Page 7 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 84

Thread: Nothing wrong with looking! Not anymore...?

  1. #61
    Senior Member Ultralight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Posts
    6,965
    You are appealing to an authority?
    I came from a real tough neighborhood. I put my hand in some cement and felt another hand." -- Rodney Dangerfield

  2. #62
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    2,910
    "Anchor baby" was used all the time by legitimate news sources when I lived in Texas. The terminology may be offensive but it is the reality there for many illegal immigrant women wanting to make sure they have that babe in the US.

  3. #63
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    1,333
    Quote Originally Posted by pinkytoe View Post
    "Anchor baby" was used all the time by legitimate news sources when I lived in Texas. The terminology may be offensive but it is the reality there for many illegal immigrant women wanting to make sure they have that babe in the US.
    People move all over the world for all sorts of reasons. American citizenship is seen as a great benefit. Back in 2015, the LA times ran a story about wealthy Chinese women coming to the US to give birth in maternity tourism:
    http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/l...826-story.html

    The same could be said for the modern equivalent of the Chinese picture brides, the Russian and Romanian women that are discussed here.

    We looked into getting an Irish passport for my husband as one grandfather was born in England, and his mother said the other was born in Ireland. (She was, alas, mistaken.) We wanted to work in Europe. So the putative Irish grandfather would have been the "anchor grandfather," I guess.

  4. #64
    Senior Member iris lilies's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    10,692
    [swear words redacted] UL, your blanket condemnationt of what "women" think and want in men is insulting. We do not have a single, monolithic thought.

    When was dating back in the day, I was interested in a man who was good with money, which meant I cared more about how much he kept, and far less about how much he made. As far as jobs and salary, I looked for men who liked their jobs and were even energized by them. Back then I thought that if someone made $15,000 that was a perfectly fine amount. That is $30,000 in today's dollars. As it turned out, DH didnt even make that much. He was a graduate assistant in a graduate program at a University.

  5. #65
    Senior Member iris lilies's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    10,692
    Quote Originally Posted by Ultralight View Post
    I have said far, far less offensive things on here and been threatened with removal.

    Now, I am not saying this person should be threatened or taken to task by the authorities. I am wondering why there is an incredibly inconsistency.
    Even the Washington Post says the term is "offensive." and uses the quotes. The quotes mean something. The Post also says:


    Overall, the folks that have argued that "anchor baby" is a slur seem to have won.

    notice the qualifying "seem" word, it has meaning here.


    But I am not really arguing whather or not the term is offensive. I accept without arguement that is it highly offensive to some, somewhat offensive to others, and to others merely an apt short hand term for an immigration concept. It doesnt necessarily wear hard on all of our ears.

    This isnt something I consider worthy of moderation. This isnt a place where we can be assured of no offense. I tend to save moderation for personal name-calling types of interaction. Now, if you had called someone "an anchor baby producing, food stamp consuming welfare queen" then that is a personal attack that needs moderation. Blatent personal name calling is just dumb and not acceptable.

    I think it is an excellent discussion point, this one of moderation. Thank you for bringing it up.
    Last edited by iris lilies; 7-7-17 at 11:57am.

  6. #66
    Senior Member JaneV2.0's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    8,050
    Quote Originally Posted by iris lilies View Post
    [swear words redacted] UL, your blanket condemnationt of what "women" think and want in men is insulting. We do not have a single, monolithic thought.

    When was dating back in the day, I was interested in a man who was good with money, which meant I cared more about how much he kept, and far less about how much he made. As far as jobs and salary, I looked for men who liked their jobs and were even energized by them. Back then I thought that if someone made $15,000 that was a perfectly fine amount. That is $30,000 in today's dollars. As it turned out, DH didnt even make that much. He was a graduate assistant in a graduate program at a University.
    I've never been interested in achievement much, and I peaked around 19. I'm taking notes for my next life...

    I've always judged men on their entertainment value--can they make me laugh? On kindness and tolerance--no criticism or "clever" snark, please. And on their ability to take care of themselves financially. There are other considerations, of course. But I'm the authority figure in my life, and I like it that way.

  7. #67
    Senior Member iris lilies's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    10,692
    Quote Originally Posted by JaneV2.0 View Post
    I've never been interested in achievement much, and I peaked around 19. I'm taking notes for my next life...

    I've always judged men on their entertainment value--can they make me laugh? On kindness and tolerance--no criticism or "clever" snark, please. And on their ability to take care of themselves financially. There are other considerations, of course. But I'm the authority figure in my life, and I like it that way.
    Oh certanly, my financial criteria was all about "can they take care of themselves financially." But also blowing money made me nervous. I would have rather had a boyfriend making $15,000 and saving $2,000 than someme making $50,000 and savinf $2,000.

  8. #68
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    1,333
    Quote Originally Posted by JaneV2.0 View Post

    I've always judged men on their entertainment value--can they make me laugh? On kindness and tolerance--no criticism or "clever" snark, please. .
    Yes! I was thinking "respectful"--I think that became of the utmost important when I encountered husband number 2--he was very respectful of people and a kind person, at a very deep level. That was such a draw, as my first husband was an abuser.

  9. #69
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    6,298
    UL, your blanket condemnation of what "women" think and want in men is insulting. We do not have a single, monolithic thought.
    + 1 plus it's different depending.

    If a woman actually is seeking kids then the good provider thing might be more relevant (don't like it? yea well obviously don't date women looking for kids. Maybe if we had Scandinavian style paid child leave it wouldn't happen, so how about you go advocate for that instead of bashing women basically for being women. Or at least support for part-time work etc. so women AND men could more easily work part-time when raising children)

    As for what women not looking for kids want, it's hard to see another human being suffer financially, it's hard to comfort them when they are worried about having no future financially, and worried a lot. You want to just have a weekend having fun, forgetting about the troubles of work and all that (because it is after-all the weekend) but they can't. You want to take vacations together but they don't get any paid time off etc.. Hard to say how awful blue collar work can be in this country, no vacation time, no overtime, little sick leave, abusive workplaces etc..

    So maybe consider that women might just not want to volunteer to take on a world second-hand economic pain (that isn't even their own), and that may be something, but really a government job is not economic pain at all, it's a steady if boring paycheck, the steadiest there is.

    How would one define being able to take care of themselves financially anyway? Is it just "current jobs wages are enough to pay the bills"? So living in mom's basement with no job is out obviously. Or are we defining it as much more than this? One can have a job with wages enough to pay the bills and a lot of economic uncertainty about the future if it's kind of dead-end, low paying, blue collar, exploitative, long uncompensated hours etc.
    Last edited by ApatheticNoMore; 7-7-17 at 1:37pm.
    If you want something to get done, ask a busy person. If you want them to have a nervous breakdown that is.

  10. #70
    Senior Member bae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Offshore
    Posts
    6,485
    Quote Originally Posted by Ultralight View Post
    You are appealing to an authority?
    No. For one thing, the Washington Post is hardly an "authority" on anything. But by all means, carry on.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •