Over the Christmas holiday my wife and I had the good fortune to join a group of friends for a little dinner party. The hosts were a young media executive and his lovely wife who happens to practice medicine. We joined about 4 other couples for some fantastic food and energetic conversation. The lyrics were straight DV.net if I say so myself. We hit everything from the nature of the education system, to De Facto Homos, to the wisdom of arranged marriages. Early in the evening after a couple of glasses of wine, the food arrived at the table. The hosts dropped platters of delicious cuisine and passed out plates. I guess each diner was expected to take a plate and serve themselves. Cool. No problem. When the hostess handed a plate my way, I nodded toward my wife indicating to pass the plate to her, because said she would be serving me.
...
...
This seemed to cause pause. Conversation stopped. Room got quiet.A beautiful sista in the corner, I think she may have been a lawyer, broke the silence with what sounded like a "shiiiiiiiii.... I've got to keep your ass away from my husband. I can't have him picking up these types of habits". Everybody fell out laughing.
The hostess told a story about her father and brothers and how her mother removed their plates after family dinners when she was a child and how she never understood it. She once said something to her mother about it in protest: "They're not crippled! They can remove their own plates!", only to be shushed up by her entire family. Although she told the story as if the incident bothered her, I noticed the memory made her smile warmly.
My wife, reached for the plate, taking it from the hostesses hand and said "Actually I enjoy making my husband's plate". She proceeded to pile on what I liked and she avoided what I don't like. She gave me extra of what she thought I needed and skipped what she didn't think was good for me. She walked around the table and placed the plate in front of me. I smiled at her and said "thank you".
There was some nervous laughter, a pregnant pause, and a silence that seemed to demand further explanation. My wife shrugged her shoulders, said something like "that's my husband. I like making his plate. I don't even think about it."
Couple of brothers chanced glances at their wives with raised eyebrows like sounds good to me. Another sister smiled, raised her glass towards my wife in salut, in a "me too" kind of fashion.
I was left with the suspicion that the initial Pavlovian protest of these young career sisters to the notion of serving their husbands lacked conviction. They wanted to make their husband's gotdamn plate too.
I got the impression they went through the motions of mock horror almost because they felt they were supposed to be horrified. Part of the uniform of the modern post feminist professional woman appears to be the flag waving championship of a gender blurred narrative of equality that divides all tasks 50 / 50.
However marriage, like nature, seems to be divided into male & female. "Equality" is overrated. Balance is supreme.
Gee Chee The Great said ...
I never needed "equal" dealing with my grandmother or mother or father.
I've seen homeboys give their everything to their little sisters or vice
versa. Too many variables in love to be trying to portion and measure
out love with "equal." Equal goes out the window like karate in a street
fight.These men out here working jobs they hate like Cube say, "...cause my son doesn't take no for an answer." You think that ain't a Negro being a servant to his family. He/she is serving because they love. They want to please.
I'm sure DV's wife serves that beautiful little girl and those two strong young
men out of love. Ain't
no equal in this. Equal is for cats that don't know a natural way to
keep their blood sugar down. -
I've always been raised to serve the men at my table. My grandmother did
it everyday, every meal. The biggest serving of meat was reserved for
granddad and we never sat down to eat without him. She also made me iron
his clothes. And he wasn't even the breadwinner.
I think the role of man in the home, however you define it, is irreplaceable. I recognize that even though in many respects, my grandmother knew she was more educated, financially stable and more aggressive in life, she recognized a need for my simple, easy-going, extremely charming grandfather.
I use to think that granddad had it made and he would never leave my grandma, but now I know better. My grandparents were separated for over 10 years before they reunited. I still think equality is important in unions but defining equality is relative to the people in the relationship. For my grandmother, just having someone to soften out her edge and share herself with made life worth living. For granddad, having a woman that made life interesting seemed to do it....and the fact that they raised two kids together.
I often forget to serve the men at my table, (charge it to immaturity) but surely, if reminded I would gladly do so. How the hell is not serving a dish any sign of feminism anyway? Gratitude at either side of the dinner table is so delicious.
50 comments:
I love this story. I believe a woman should serve her husband... out of respect for his position as "head of household." Many don't understand that the title HOH isn't designed for a man to rule with abusive force. The term actually defines the serious responsibility that comes with providing for and protecting a family.
If a man understands that role and takes it seriously, dammit, he should have his feet rubbed while he partakes of the food on that plate!
Even better, a man who understands the gravity of HOH can only inspire fierce femininity from his wife. I haven't found anything more decadently feminine than inspiring masculinity in a man. That's why radical feminists (i.e. man haters) are dreadfully masculine.
I'm just sayin...
I love to cook and make a plate for my man. I love when a man acts like a man, for example, when I used to go out to dinner with my ex, he would ask me what I wanted, and he would order both of our meals. I liked that. My father used to always allow the women at the table to put their orders in before him. To me, those things represent masculinity.
That being said I knew this man that I used to go to a communal dining center with. He was very dominant not only towards his wife but towards everyone around him. Dinner was served family style, and this man INSISTED on making up the plates of everyone at his table. I guess it gave him a thrill to be able to control what everyone around him could eat.
When I was younger my mom used to make up the plates. She always made sure to serve the biggest piece of meat to my dad. Even if he was not home for dinner, she would make up his plate, set it aside, and eat with us. Then she would go back into the kitchen when he got home, serve him his meal and sit with him while he ate. 33 years of marriage, they were together until the day she died. Now he is with some chick who has him acting like a pussy instead of a man. So not what I want out of life. Damn, a man should be a man.
Ha...beautiful. They tried to call out your wife's womanhood only to flush out their own husband's womanhood.
It should be a choice, not a requirement. And, people do have the right to move on...
DV I am not feeling you. I see my wife as my partner not my servant. Sometimes she gets my plate sometimes I get hers. I don't see her as my equal she IS my equal.
whether or not a woman should get her man's plate isn't even the primary issue for me. the woman who made the comment was kind of rude. if that's what your wife wanted to do then so what. that shows a lack of decorum to say that at a dinner party. but maybe you all are close and can say such things...
now the plate issue. on the one hand i could see what a pleasure it is to nourish a man. i used to feel staunchly the opposite. and honestly it still grates my nerves a bit when i see it. but the older i get i inherently realize the facts of the situation and not depend on how i may "feel" about it. males are gonna be males. they like to be fed, like it or not. they seem to look around like a deer in headlights if their woman doesn't bring them food. let him sit at the head of the table. but make him pull out your chair first. make his plate, but if he's acting up, make him a *special meal* ..ahem.
women actually control everything.
if he wants to please her and make her plate, that is beautiful also. doesn't make him more or less of a man, unless he is doing it out of control. i would say run Run RUN from a man who is controlling what you eat.
to want to please your mate is a beautiful and natural thing. whatever you two decide works for is your business.
also, there is A LOT of blessing in sharing and feeding people. so whether or not it's passe for a woman to serve her man's plate, your wife is getting all the baraka/blessing from doing it. so she wins.
on a side note, don't eat from someone who is begrudgingly feeding you. you are consuming bad bad energy.
loves this blog. you cant update fast enuf for me :)
Don't know if these are all the same anonymous.@11:24
Equal is needed when you know you dealing with cutthroat dudes.
I never needed "equal" dealing with my grandmother or mother or father. I've seen homeboys give their everything to their little sisters or vice versa. Too many variables in love to be trying to portion and measure out love with "equal." Equal goes out the window like karate in a street fight.
These men out here working jobs they hate like Cube say, "...cause my son doesn't take no for an answer." You think that ain't a Negro being a servant to his family. He/she is serving because they love. They want to please.
I'm sure DV's wife serves that beautiful little girl and those two strong young men out of love. Ain't no equal in this. Equal is for cats that don't know a natural way to keep their blood sugar down.
"the woman who made the comment was kind of rude."
Man not only is it rude, but she still in "got her guard up" dating mode with her own husband. It's like she openly saying in front of everybody that no nigga is worth that treatment not even her own husband.
Plus that's just having a bad opinion about people. Why assume their is something "oppressive" taking place because a man is being served by his wife? My son serves me around friends AND he serves my friends. People thing I'm black gestapo. What they don't know I trained my boy by personally serving him. Putting love into making dishes with aesthetic, clothes t color coordinate etc. Nothing is thrown together everything is vibrating with love.
He makes a mess, I tell him let's clean up this mess. I give him example. When I'm absent he wants to please me. He wants to honor me. I'm securing a tradition that Negroes ain't worked out since slavery. All that lip smack'n and "what are people going to say" got to go.
Old girl only revealed to an audience that her love for her husband is conditional. Think about it, she didn't have to say anything. She didn't have to comment. But she reacted. Blurted out something before checking Mrs. DV's reasoning.
That same psychology is being passed on to these children.
What they don't know I trained my boy by personally serving him. Putting love into making dishes with aesthetic, clothes t color coordinate etc. Nothing is thrown together everything is vibrating with love.
He makes a mess, I tell him let's clean up this mess. I give him example. When I'm absent he wants to please me. He wants to honor me. I'm securing a tradition that Negroes ain't worked out since slavery.
My policy and praxis for my own son exactly GCV.
The example set by jiggaboo jones as described on this post is some developmentally arrested infantilism - by comparison...,
Brilliant Mr. Gee Chee Vision and tres sexy!
Laetitia
What I don't really get is why people always want to judge the relationships of others.
Why are the "feminists" all up in arms when a woman wants to cater to her man, and insist she is being oppressed? Aren't we supposed to have CHOICES? If a woman's choice is to defer to her man, why is that wrong? I thought feminism was supposed to be about replacing "male domination" with "equality". Instead, women are being told that it is oppressive for a man to control her BUT she had better do EXACTLY what feminists want her to do, or else. How is being controlled by women any less oppressive than being controlled by a man?
Now, on the other hand, I believe that a woman should be able to choose how she conducts herself around her man. Why should someone who believes in more traditional sex roles demand that every else in the world live their lives the same way??
How the hell is the woman who is catering to her man hurting the feminists? Conversely, how is a woman who pursues a career instead of a family hurting someone who chooses a more traditional role?
The only people who should be concerned with a relationship between a man and his wife are the people are living under the same roof as them.
As long as no one is being harmed, let people conduct their lives as they want to conduct them!
your blog is good. visit my blog too
I agree with 'Joanna' @Dec 30, 2010 7:40:00 PM
It is about choices;I never held it against stay-at-home moms nor career women, nor women w/families and family. Do what you can, to make the best choices 'for you'. If a couple (both, individual partners) are happy in how their relationship is structured, than that is fine. What I would object to, is when one partner, dominates/dictates the relationship, based on selfish wants, this would go for male or female. Feminism, had good and bad.
I've always been raised to serve the men at my table. My grandmother did it everyday, every meal. The biggest serving of meat was reserved for granddad and we never sat down to eat without him. She also made me iron his clothes. And he wasn't even the breadwinner.
I think the role of man in the home, however you define it, is irreplaceable. I recognize that even though in many respects, my grandmother knew she was more educated, financially stable and more aggressive in life, she recognized a need for my simple, easy-going, extremely charming grandfather.
I use to think that granddad had it made and he would never leave my grandma, but now I know better. My grandparents were separated for over 10 years before they reunited. I still think equality is important in unions but defining equality is relative to the people in the relationship. For my grandmother, just having someone to soften out her edge and share herself with made life worth living. For granddad, having a woman that made life interesting seemed to do it....and the fact that they raised two kids together.
I often forget to serve the men at my table, (charge it to immaturity) but surely, if reminded I would gladly do so. How the hell is not serving a dish any sign of feminism anyway? Gratitude at either side of the dinner table is so delicious.
I think the issue here is not the fact that your wife chose to serve you.
The issue that probably caused the silence was your comment, that “she would be serving you” and your head nod to past the plate to your wife, instead of your wife asking for your plate herself.
Maybe it seemed to the guests that your wife was taking a subservient position to you based off of implied dominance. Maybe it would have been different if you said, “My wife likes to fix my plate.” After all, women have been dominated by males for the past 200 years through being told that we should be servants to men and we she willingly give our money to men; and that’s how your comment came across through text.
Though your wife volunteers to serve you, she is not obligated to do so, simply because you are the man in the relationship. Contrary to popular belief, the reality is that most men technically are no longer the “heads of households,” because to be the head means to bring home all your money for your woman to spend, while the woman stays unemployed and tending to the home.
Today, most men and women both PROVIDE for the household.
With both men and women working to bring home their money, gender roles have changed. Unfortunately, not too many men are willing to accept this change, because men benefit from women’s subservience and willingness to place men’s needs ahead of their own.
I agree with the commenters who said that ppl should do what works best for them. But men should not get mad, if a woman does not want to “serve” you. It’s time people actually start treating relationships like team work, instead of the typical master/slave paradigm.
Contrary to popular belief, the reality is that most men technically are no longer the “heads of households,” because to be the head means to bring home all your money for your woman to spend, while the woman stays unemployed and tending to the home.
I file my taxes as HOH because I'm a single mother and therefore the only financial provider. I question whether that definition defines HOH in a spiritual sense.
I see HOH as a responsibility to provide and protect. A man can do that as the primary wage earner, but can also do that as a strong protector who stays home to home-school his children after making such an informed decision with his wife.
I absolutely enjoyed reading this. As an african woman, growing up, you watch what the women around you do, and cross your fingers praying for the day when you would have to do the same, for your men and any visitors you may have.
I am an amazing host, when people come to my house they never want to live. So you can imagine what i do for my man. I left Africa, got a degree, and live in a first world country, but i have never forgotten all those moments at home when my mum screamed dinner time, and w woul scurry to the kitchen and get a dish of water to wash my dad's hands. My mum used to do it a lot when we were younger, but as a teenager, i was the one made to do so. I would half kneel at first and my dad would smack my leg till iv knelt down washed his hands, dried them, and my mum enters with his plate of food.
Fast forward to today. I am an adult, i hold my own, i get a man, and instinctively this is what i want to do. My mum said to me growing up, be a good woman, be an excellent housewife, be your man's helper, but dont go around kneeling and serving for every John. The day you kneel, understand you have chosen him.
So days go by, and im dating this guy, i make supper and the thought occurs, i so want to serve him, want him to lean back, relax as i pour some warm water over his hands.
I planned his favourite meal, made it a big thing, when supper came, he thought he would come to the kitchen instead i told him to relax.
When i walked in with the dish and towel in hand, his face became nervous, i then became worried that maybe this is too much for him?
I soldiered on, kneeling before him he put out his hands and washed them. No eye contact. This went of for many months, i had decided he was the one, and i was gonna do what i was raised to do.
When his parents visited, i did the same, washed his dads hands, his mum, his hands all the while kneeling, and i swear he wished the ground could swallow him.
His parents left, and that night, he opened up to me, explaining how much of a woman i was and how i made him feel like a King. To this day his dad adores me, and i believe its in the simple things we do.
My friends vehemently oppose what i do, but i have taken to ignoring their advice, i love my man, and 3 years later, we r so happy. He almost got lost in this world of man who arent assertive, men who just arent men anymore, but i brought him back, at a restaurant when we are ready to order, i look at him and he does his thang ordering for me, exactly what i like.
So you have a gem of a wife, i bet you already knew that!
I think it was perfectly summed up with the statement " "Equality" is overrated. Balance is supreme."
50/50 does not mean equal it means even. Both are giving an even amount and it is balanced. Whether your wife served you your plate is not the issue because I am sure that you serve your wife in other ways. The currency of what is given does not necessarily change its value in the eyes of the recipient. You do for your significant other what means something to him/her and that what makes it valueable. That may entail making a plate, cleaning a room, taking out trash, changing the oil, whatever it is.
Like you said, its all about balance.
Had your wife said, "my gas tank is empty? Hand the keys to my husband to fill my tank", the women at the table would have given her high 5's; there would have been no concern about whether she's contributing 50/50 to the automotive maintenance or whether he's being oppressed by such responsibilities.
But the opposite happens and the kneejerk Pavlovian feminism can't contain itself.
Women haven't been "oppressed" for the past 200 years. They have been wives and mothers and have enjoyed those roles. That's why women today, no matter what nonsense they are propagandized with, deep down want to be wanted by a man.
Good point II on the double standard. I still don't see what all the fuss is about.
I suppose one would have to ask his Mrs. if she does or does not feel oppressed by that action.
My wife knows how to fill her own gas tank, and I know how to set the table and clean dishes if need be. Then again, my son knows how to and does all of those jobs...and then some. Can't send my boy into the world not knowing how to change car oil, wash clothes and clean dishes on his own. I hope he appreciates the gesture if his future woman does get him a plate, but I wouldn't want him to just expect it.
Only a developmentally arrested muhphuggah would....,
"think the issue here is not the fact that your wife chose to serve you.
The issue that probably caused the silence was your comment, that “she would be serving you” and your head nod to past the plate to your wife, instead of your wife asking for your plate herself.
Maybe it seemed to the guests that your wife was taking a subservient position to you based off of implied dominance." Major Harvey
Hello Major Harvey. Welcome to the spot.
Welcome to the spot.
My wife? Subservient?
Nah.
Nobody thought that.
People often say things they don't really believe.
The feigned consternation initially expressed by a couple of the sisters to the idea that a husband ... would expect ... his wife ... to serve him ... was more a reflexive demonstration of conformity than it was the product of any rational process.
That's like suggesting the husband is being subservient for opening the door for his wife, taking her coat, or pulling out her chair.
As any man knows ... it's an honor to hold a door ... for a woman who appreciates it.
I imagine it is an honor to serve a plate to a man who appreciates it.
"a man who appreciates it." Right there are the operative words
"50/50 does not mean equal it means even. Both are giving an even amount and it is balanced. Whether your wife served you your plate is not the issue because I am sure that you serve your wife in other ways. The currency of what is given does not necessarily change its value in the eyes of the recipient. You do for your significant other what means something to him/her and that what makes it valueable. That may entail making a plate, cleaning a room, taking out trash, changing the oil, whatever it is. " R Johnson
Big Ups.
"My wife knows how to fill her own gas tank, and I know how to set the table and clean dishes if need be." DMG
That has nothing to do with it.
It is not at all about "need".
It's not about chores.
Ultimately the interaction between a husband and wife is sublime.
It's not a game of "scratch my back and I'll scratch yours".
It's a game of "scratching your back is scratching my back."
Serving you dinner is serving me dinner.
Holding the door for you is holding the door for me.
The Plantation has conditioned men and women to view each others as competitors.
Divide and Conquer.
Hegelian Head Fake.
Thordaddy breaks it down the best 'Radical Autonomy"
"a man who appreciates it." Right there are the operative words
Actually those aren't the operative words. Anyone with so little self-esteem that they would play slave to someone who acts as master deserves to be treated like a slave.
Ergo...this discussion fits into the ongoing discussion about plantation Negros.
A real woman isn't a servant-slave. She loves her husband and loves him the way a woman should love a man, including serving dinner.
Feminists and other immature liberals rattle on about whether Mrs. Vesey has a choice, whether Mr. Vesey expects to be served, whether Mrs. Vesey feels oppressed by it.
Yawn...let me get some caffeinated green tea before such elementary, irrelevant nonsense puts me to sleep.
If we were talking about a job where responsibilities are divided among several staff members, would anyone pull out this phony intellectualism about whether doctor A feels oppressed because he is expected to handle all trauma cases or whether doctor B feels he has no choice when he takes responsibility for pediatric cases? Why aren't they dividing the specialties 50/50?
I continue to marvel at the hypocrisy and double standard of those who will chop off the head of a spouse who dares to even suggest that each spouse has a distinct role to play, while showing up daily to a job where they are not "appreciated", where they are "expected" to do certain things without being asked and where no one cares whether you feel "oppressed".
Feminism made women believe that husbands are oppressors and bosses are liberators. Ain't that a b....?
I am a bit confused Intellectual Insurgent, because I made comments saying that I approve of a woman meeting the needs of her husband in this way. Is there something wrong with me saying that the man should appreciate what his woman does for him, just like she should appreciate what he does for her?
Joanna,
There is nothing wrong with it as much as it is beside the point. Getting hung up on who appreciates what is a conversation about nothing.
My family spends a lot of time with two families where the wife is the breadwinner and the husband takes on a lot of the kid duties. No one asks if she is changing her share of diapers, or whether he feels oppressed by being expected to handle the household responsibilities.
The double standard of the discussion illustrates that none of this has to do with "choice", "equality", "appreciation" or "oppressoion" but, rather, is about convincing women that men are bad and that any sort of positive relationship between a man and a woman means the woman is being oppressed. The sad part is that people fall for it.
Intellectual Insurgent- I actually wrote about that recently on a few occasions. The first was exactly WHY I do not consider myself a "feminist"... I think feminism tends to LIMIT a woman's choices, because feminists tell a woman that she can choose to do what she wants in life AS LONG AS her choice is to be a career woman, and to concentrate on pursuing her own material success.
On the other hand, I also wrote about the "Christian Patriarchy Movement" in which fathers have complete and total control over their daughter's until he transfers his authority to her husband. There is no room for negotiation... what the man says goes, and if a man fails in life, it is his wife's fault.
Personally, I am someone who appreciates being in a more "traditional" role when I am in a relationship, but I believe that that is not a choice I should unilaterally impose on my children, or on anyone else.
The reason I pointed out the appreciation thing is kind of a personal thing. I enjoy pleasing my man, and part of it for me is the feeling I get when he tells me that I am making him happy.
Intelligent Insurgent: I don't think appreciation is beyond the point. Its part of the point. In this particular case what we're talking about was a courtesy. Courtesies are optional. Courtesies should be appreciated because its not about whether or not we "expect" them as much as we are thankful for the effort the person put to being courteous. I'm a sure DV said "thank you" when she handed it to him even tho' he "expects" it. I'm sure my lady "expects" me to open her car door, but its nice to hear thank you when I do. Being appreciated makes doing things for someone worth it. Its not about a role or who does what duties. Playing your position is never a given. You mentioned people going to "a job" and dealing with being unapprecited. Well finish your thought because sometimes people leave those jobs for those reasons. And similarly people leave marriages for the same.
Years back, a male friend of mine told me he was looking for a woman who made everything she did look "effortless". Me and my girls got such a kick out of that concept and it always stuck with me.
So...just last week, finally coming out of the sleep deprivation of my little one's first few months, I cleaned the house, cooked dinner, had it waiting on the table when Husband got home from work, kids were happy and kitchen was spotless. Oh...and I looked good too.
Who cares if he appreciated it. I felt like Super Woman!! :-) I made it look effortless and I appreciated my own damn self. LOL!!
And once you appreciate yourself, everyone else falls in line. Same with love. Can't give or receive love if you don't love yourself.
People who appreciate themselves don't surround themselves with haters. Haters are drawn to haters.
So asking whether the man appreciates some gesture truly is a conversation about nothing.
Intelligent Insurgent: Clap, clap, applause, applause. Yay for you.
You are truly unique and individual in that you are the only person in the world that does NOT WANT TO BE APPRECIATED for what she does.
Appreciation is not a prerequisite. A person's self-esteem or self-worth is not based on whether or not someone appreciates their efforts. However, it sure is nice when people say thank you id'nit?
Despite how "self-assured" you're making yourself out to be (and you may very well be, I'm sure) I am positive that you're husband shows his appreciation for what you do. It may not be a thank you. It may be with him doing something extra for you. Because I'm pretty sure, with as self-confident as you type, you wouldn't clean the house, cook dinner and have it waiting on the table for a man that didn't appreciate it.
You miss the point my friend. It goes to what DV said above - a woman serving her husband is not servitude, it is art. And I would never surround myself with someone who does not appreciate art.
Just as a chef would not cook for those who do not appreciate food.
Please step out of the paradigm with which you are accustomed and ask yourself why you do the things you do. Do you do them "to be appreciated" or do you do them because they represent your highest self? If it is the latter, then the "appreciation" of others is irrelevant. If it is the former, you have an appetite that can never be satisfied.
You mentioned earlier that people leave jobs and marriages because they don't feel appreciated. Indeed they do. And where do they go? To other marriages and other jobs where they don't feel appreciated. Because such people don't appreciate themselves, they constantly hunger to "feel appreciated", demanding that others give them that feeling and playing victim when they don't get it (although they are incapable of even understanding what it is to appreciate something).
Read Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand or Shibumi by Trevanian sometime. They might help you grasp these concepts.
With regard to my husband showing his appreciation, my husband is not the guy who is going to come home with a dozen roses or some cornball, Hallmark stuff like that.
However, he remodeled our entire house, fixes anything that breaks, cooks the best prime rib on earth, maintains our cars, etc. And he does it all to perfection, making it look effortless.
Excellence appreciates excellence. He shows his appreciation, if you want to call it that, by handling his responsibilities with flair. And I do the same.
Intellectual Insurgent... when you say that you would not surround yourself with someone who does not appreciate art, and a woman serving her husband is art, aren't you affirming what I said... that appreciation is key??
When I say appreciation, I do not mean flowers and boxes of candy. I mean reciprocation. I have a man I am close friends with. I do research for him about various topics he is interested in. I know he appreciates what I do, because he shares his knowledge with me. He turns me on to new concepts, ideas, and materials that I was not previously aware of. He is not big on "thank yous", but he shows his appreciation by opening my eyes to new things. And on the occassions when he DOES express his appreciation in words, it is an added little bonus thrill.
But, you saying that you would not share your life with someone who does not appreciate does reiterate that appreciation is a key, it just may differ in form from person to person.
II: I'm not missing your point. I never said people do thing TO GET appreciation. I specifically said "Appreciation is not a prerequisite." I said its nice to be appreciated.
I can agree that doing something to garner appreciation is futile. But I never said it, so don't quite understand why we are discussing that.
Your statement about leaving jobs to go to another unappreciative job is your opinion. There are people that have found success with that and others that haven't. Attacking their character doesn't make your point more vaild. I'm sure there's people that exist out there like that, but that's a tagent and a whole new blog post.
I've read Ayn Rand. Discussing her concepts is irrelevant when you're misinterpreting my posts.
And I know plenty of "sistas" who don't view flowers as corny. Be careful shawtee. Your high horse has bad knees.
Do you do them "to be appreciated" or do you do them because they represent your highest self?
Competence tending toward mastery is a laudable end-in-itself, but surely not one to be confused with any human being's "higher", still less "highest" self.
Read Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand or Shibumi by Trevanian sometime. They might help you grasp these concepts.
uh..., no.
II you was on a classic role till you swerved over into this nasty stank-ass rotten fish in the road.
Rand and Rodney Whitlock(Trevanian) are both very well and good for stoking the imagination of 20th century teenagers - but to hold either the screenwriter or the airport paperback writer up as exemplars of anything beyond vapid amusements is ridiculous on the face of it. (though perfectly in keeping with the pervading standard of infinitely self-rationalizing vapidity maintained by his congo dandiness, jiggaboo jones)
Much like my sister II, I am the devoted, dutiful person that I am because it is who I am. I focus on my contribution toward a relationship versus any expectations that I may have for the people that I have relationships with.
I relish my role as woman, mother and I am fully aware of what that role affords me when executed properly. I know that by serving my family I am the ultimate beneficiary!
For over 15 years of marriage I was the bread winner in my home. I still managed to service papa, exclusively breastfeed four children and keep an immaculate home. I did it all without missing a lick and I practically skipped around this damn place. It's how I've kept this moma body tight - real talk!
I don't recall hearing a lot of thanks but I know that I never had to stop and get gas, bring groceries in, shovel snow, open doors, deal with scheduling repairs or maintenance of any kind or whether the children were getting the proper and sufficient stimulation.
Having giving ourselves completely to each other, everything else fell into place. The children are wonderfully loving, thoughtful, respectful, and intelligent. There's been minimal interruption in the household because he and I had already laid the foundation of servicing the family unit over self.
My high horse has bad knees? LOL!! That is one of the funniest comments I've heard in a while.
I'll be cracking up about that one for a while. And I am sure my appreciation of your whit has nothing to do with why you made the comment or with whether you would say it again.
You are still missing the point, but it's ok. We've got time.
Let's go back to the where this started. Does DV "appreciate his wife serving him"? My position is that it is a silly question.
Why? Because...Mrs. DV is a true woman...who would never be with someone who could not appreciate a true woman.
To even ask the question is to insult her; it reveals what little you think of yourself, what little you think of your relationships and to presume the victimhood of women.
It is demeaning and meant to demean.
Interesting dialogue DV...is it not amazing how the "couples" watched how their counterparts were interacting...your wife was not "serving" she was "loving and appreciating" ... and I am sure had she made a request for you to prepare her plate you would have simply responded " what would you like? Real love is not in a "closet" it can be spotted anywhere...ain't it funny how the way you feel shows on your face...were you able to recognize "real love" at that party or just "couples". My biggest thrill was cooking the "ENTIRE the meal for wife and family...watching my son and nephews and nieces pay attention..
II: Glad you liked it. Ask DV, I can come up with the on the fly. ;)
I'm not missing your point. This is not about questioning Mrs. DV or DV's appreciation of each other. This is saying that people do more for people who do appreciate them. The comment is made in general to the conversation. Your husband shows his appreciation buy remodeling the house, maintaining the cars. I said earlier that the value is based on the recipient.
In reality, what happened at that dinner party had sh!t to do with roles. It was simply a wife doing something nice for her husband. That simple. I'm sure when they go to a restaurant she doesn't run in the back and fix his plate. They were in a public setting and she felt like doing that for her husband. Nothing more. Also, because I believe that DV shares alot of his views on food with (and potentially from, lol) his wife, that could've motivated thing
This is saying that people do more for people who do appreciate them.
Perhaps it is semantics, but the danger of this approach is that it becomes a scorecard, a balance sheet so to speak. And people who require balance sheets don't tolerate imbalances for very long. Everything becomes a tit for tat, which I would bet is at the root of many divorces.
When I saw my DIVORCED sister-in-law over Thanksgiving, we were talking about the work of raising small children and she turned to my husband and said, "brother, are you doing your fair share of changing the diapers"? Without missing a beat, he said "no".
I fell in love with my Husband all over again at that moment.
She started to give him a speech about helping, appreciating me, blah, blah, blah, thinking she was being my advocate or something. I finally chimed in and said, "changing diapers is my job" and her face fell to the floor.
RJ, I will propose that, instead of saying that people will do more for people who appreciate them, we will word it as "excellent people do not surround themselves with people who do not appreciate excellence". If excellence is your standard, you won't have to concern yourself with whether you are "appreciated".
By the way, Sister Nikki, we need to arrange a marriage of my daughters to your sons. :-)
II: Its not semantics. Its fact. But my statement speaks to the result, not the motivation.
What you're thinking is that I'm saying "people WANT to do more for people who appreciation them". That's not what I'm saying even tho' that's true as well.
Your example about your sister-in-law has do with subjective values. What your S-I-L values is a man that helps with diapers. You don't. Who's wrong? Neither of you.
You're statement about "excellent people do not surround themselves with people who do not appreciate excellence" is what prompts things like the "high horse" comment. What YOU want from your husband may not be what another woman wants from hers. Is she any less "excellent"?
You're making it sound like you're not worried about being appreciated because you don't care about it. That's not the case tho'. Because you surround yourself with "excellent" (translated: appreciative) people. If he wasn't "excellent/appreciative" then he wouldn't be your husband. ;)
What YOU want from your husband may not be what another woman wants from hers. Is she any less "excellent"?
Possibly.
I want someone who puts 100% into everything he does. Because I do. A woman who accepts anything less does so because she puts in less than 100%. By definition, she is less excellent.
And such a woman lives with the consequences of that mediocrity. Leaving Husband #1 will only lead her to another mediocre guy because she is mediocre. Maybe she'll punk him into changing diapers but, because she values mediocrity in herself and others, the stage has already been set for him to fail in some other way.
Your subjectivism is what Thordaddy calls "Radical Autonomy". If everything is everything, no one is wrong, then what is the standard by which you conduct your relationships with other human beings?
You can't be serious? Hilarious, because you are.
What the heck is 100%? Its cool to throw around keywords and hip vague phrases but its quite meaningless. Why? Because your 100% is not the same as another's 100%. Its subjective. But you address things with a very condescending tone like what you do and what you value is above others. Sorry young lady, but that's not the case. Glad its working for you tho'.
You say my "subjectivism" yet all you do is bring up your personal experiences and your standards. Hmmmmm?
After your last comment you can feel free to get the last word in. I've never been one to maintain pointless discussions over the internet. It was fun tho'.
Subjectivism.....LOL Whooo, thanks I needed that.
Equality is for equals my friend. I am on a high horse and have no interest in stepping down to conform to the mediocrity of the peasantry.
jiggabess puh-leeze....,
Your subjectivism is what Thordaddy calls "Radical Autonomy".
oh hails to the gnaw!!!!
the very second you commence to citing the ultimate in ashy-kneed peasants as an authority, you've played yourself on levels heretofore previously unimagined.
STOP
you're better than this...,
^^ Pork eatin' misanthropic Jiggaboo Negro struggles to maintain the tyranny of the mediocre.
Post a Comment