Community > Posts By > MyLastGroom
I don't have a problem with the woman proposing to the guy. That is if he is ready most of the time women are ready long before the men are. Therefore women actually give the men more time to think whether they are ready or not... I have no problem if the relationship has went on and on and marriage is something the woman really wants. But normally if the relationship has went that long and the man has not proposed it is due too he has no intentions and don't want to marry but to keep things the way they are. Myself I'm about as open and bold as they come but I'm old school as well... I still believe in men proposing. But then at my age marriage is not something I feel is a must... but if it happens again it will be due to the guy makes that step... ![]() Thanks for sharing. Please don't you think you could have a different final outcome if you apply your boldness next time love knocks on your door? Kind of taking the initiative and the power? |
|
|
|
It'd be hard to deny a woman who is down on her knees. ![]() No matter what, I ain't gittin' hitched again. ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
|
|
I wouldn't say it's wrong for a woman to propose, I just don't think you're going to find many women who are willing to do so. ...well, that's the point: If it isn't wrong, why is it such a "tabboo" for women to do when they feel like it? Could it be that "macho" society forbids it or that "humble" womanity simply capitulated? |
|
|
|
As long as i get a fkn expensive ring out of it im game. lol....hmmmmmm....that's all I can say ![]() |
|
|
|
in no way am i meaning to demean women in any way, but i personally would prefer to do the proposing myself. is that not half the experience? deciding how to do it, picking the ring, getting down on one knee? and on the opposite side, is that not half the surprise for women? not knowing exactly when/how it's going to happen? i think what makes your proposal out of the norm is that you are taking the traditional sense of the proposal completely out of it. you are taking all the expectation out. in no way am i saying that this is a bad thing, but i dont think that it would be the way i personally would want to approach the situation Thank you for sharing your perspective on the issue, Sir. It's true that we live in a man's world where chauvinistic male define what should constitute the "norm". By this discuss, we are trying to explore possibilities of melting the granite walls of chauvinism somewhat and let the woman express her heart without judgments, backlashes and shame. It's not going to be easy, I know, but at least someone has to try..... |
|
|
|
What is this traditional notion that forbids women from boldly popping a love or marriage proposal to guys? Generally it is believed that the European woman seem to be bolder and freer to express their intentions compared to the American woman. Are women truly free in love matters? I think that women here generally think it is the man's responsibility to pop the question - looks like bondage to me. Your thoughts please.....??? I don't know how European women act but this is how one American woman acts. Twenty years ago, I had dated a gentleman for a long time and I felt ready for marriage. He still had some hesitations primarily due to his career/financial path. So, I went and purchased a wedding set and gave the rings to him one night saying, "Okay, if/when you are ready, just ask. If you are never ready, that's okay too." I had no 'set-in-stone' (no pun intended) expectations and I explained that to him. He was very appreciative that I had taken the financial burden off of him. He was also grateful that I didn't pop the question because, as he told me, he would have felt completely emasculated. (Women aren't the only ones who believe it's the man who should be doing the asking). Six months later he asked me to marry him. I realize what I did isn't considered the 'norm' by most people. But, just because I'm a woman doesn't mean I can't or shouldn't propose. Shoot, I probably could have way back then but I was trying to keep in mind what would make his life easier. And, this was the solution. It worked out beautifully. Too bad the marriage didn't work out that way (lol). Thank you so much for sharing from experience (they say it's the best teacher, huh). You are a pace-setter/pathfinder for womanity then and we raise hearty cheers for your boldness. I think contemporary woman should cross the threshold and air their affection without societal encumberances - especially when it comes to popping that question. ![]() |
|
|
|
Yikes. Confidence is truly a great quality. If you spend time convincing people what they dont seem to see, it can sorta look like arrogance...even if you arent arrogant. I think some folks may have responded with that in mind from your list of positive choices. dunno. I do hope you see, now that you have re activated, that you are welcome here, free to prefer what you prefer. I hope you are willing to receive the responses you get as: 'the gamet of perspectives out there'. folks are not compelled to agree, particularly when they are anonymous. That can really be a good thing, unless they start calling you names n junk. Thanks for posting. I look forward to more. I love different perspectives. ![]() Thanks so much for your exuberant and motivational posture here. I enjoyed your perspective. Interestingly, in my profession (not listed here) we aim to convince the other or to sway a person's thinking pattern. We are successful when the other side accepts our view or holds theirs precariously. It makes life fun - so, yes, we will make it fun here. I'm glad great minds like yours are here for vigorous debates ![]() |
|
|
|
Topic:
Home Wreckers Award
|
|
categories and labels are always open to interpretation but i find them boring and assumptuous why can't we all just be. Thanks for the insight. Unfortunately, as long as we are stuck in this planet of diverse humanity, these issues will always be discussed - I think! |
|
|
|
Topic:
Home Wreckers Award
|
|
I don't mean to ignite a race war here at all, but just to initiate intense discussion. One of my Professors believe that Black girls are better home wreckers than White girls. She is a black woman. She thought Latina women are subservient or more submissive. But again she warned me: Hey Sam, before you gallop down the alley to that White girl's door, be sure you already bought you a burial spot at the nearest cemetry because ever since O.J., they've decided to kill you first and weep at your grave later. OMG! And I was like, Prof., so who do I hook up with after this scare session. She goes: go with the moment. Now I'm in a dilemma-it's called Sam's limbo. What do you all think? Sorry but your professor shouldn't be teaching. Generalizations and stereotypes are a dangerous thing. That is like saying all Asian women are submissive. My aunt is full blooded Korean and I guarantee she isn't submissive. I used to live in the Philippines and they aren't all submissive. As said before, culture, family, peers, etc have a big influence on things. So does a person's mind and heart. Sorry but anyone closed minded enough to teach stereotypes and generalizations shouldn't be teaching. She needs to think outside the box. JMO Your argument is compelling and I agree totally. |
|
|
|
Topic:
Home Wreckers Award
|
|
she may have a degree and is entitled to give her thesis on "home wreckers" but doesn't mean it's fact,people may date within a certain race and draw conclusion about that race,also generalizing certain races there maybe a majority of it thats true but the fact is home wreckers come in all walks of life very persuasive argument. I agree |
|
|
|
Topic:
Home Wreckers Award
|
|
she is a fool to open her mouth Not quite Oceanbluze, this is a great discussion, a fool is a person who lacks judgment and sense, and I am neither nor by participating am I projecting that image. We are here to discuss all topics of interest, no given answer is foolish and to be quite honest, it is through knowledge that we are given power to understand reason and logic. Alina ![]() Alina, I don't think Oceanbuze was referring to you in her comment. I thought so too when I saw it, but after noticing that it was her first comment on the issue, I realized she was referring to the professor. Your views are articulate and focused and I don't see anything you've said so far that would warrant any negative accolade. Please share away!!! |
|
|
|
Topic:
maybe this was a mistake
|
|
So I've been a member for about all of a half an hour. I've already had three sex offers one from someone who is married. Is this just a big joke? Maybe it was a mistake making an account. . . Hi Welcome! I guess that's the "hazing" experience meant to scare you at inception. Yep, I encountered the good, the bad and the ugly immediately I joined, forcing me to deactivate momentarily before "manning up" to defend my grounds. You can block naughty offers/senders, as well as report them. Just focus on your primary agenda here and you'll do just fine. |
|
|
|
Topic:
FIRE IN THE WOODLANDS/CONROE
Edited by
MyLastGroom
on
Sun 11/07/10 11:46 PM
|
|
Any Lady in The Woodlands / Conroe area want to experience the FIRE of genuine love and affection? I am the element ordained to ignite the passion you've never experienced, but always longed for in life. I am closer than you think. BE THE ONE. Buzz me and you will forever be grateful you did - for life.
|
|
|
|
God doesn't join two people in that essence. We are to find someone we can love. "There's someone for everyone" is sort of a myth. There is if you wish to make it that way, but automatically it isn't that way. In marriage God merely recognizes the request to be joined with one another. He doesn't "instigate" it. Great perspective! How about in societies or communities that neither believes in nor accept "God" as an authority. They equally marry - who does the recognizing thing you refer to - which kind of validates the choice? My perspective it wouldn't hold much at all. For it wasn't sanctified by our father. It's by God's authority that we do become as one flesh to enjoy each other for eternity, so with it not being set out before our father I do not believe he would sanctify it. ...so what happens when the marriage, supposedly "sanctified by the father" bitterly dissolves? How do we then define the ascribed sanctification? Presumably, whatever the Lord does shall be permanent. When impermanence results, whose act/choice is impugned? There technically isn't anything as a "divorce". The bible specifically says let no man put asunder what the father has joined. But, if one of the spouses cheats on the other, the marriage becomes obsolete. The only way to be completely absolved from the marriage is for one of the spouses to have passed away on earth. Marriages will ONLY work if both spouses push it to work. It working is through the actions the two takes towards each other through their life together. The father doesn't take our free will away therefore does not stop such from happening even though he's sanctified the marriage. Well well, here I beg to differ with you a bit. There is such a thing as "divorce" - ideally and really. It is as old as the human race and has been practiced in traditional and theocratic societies before ever Abraham was born. Yes, the Bible forbids divorce in cases of "what GOD JOINED TOGETHER" so the question is, how many marriages can confidently claim that GOD PUT them together. Being put together by God is different from being put together by a priest or pastor, etc. God sees the end from the begining, so if he puts together something he already foresaw breaking apart, then that raises question as to the wisdom. But knowing that it is impossible to overturn God's purpose, I am of the view that if God himself put a marriage together, no matter what, it will succeed. But then, the world is not a theocracy. My issue is that the rate of divorce is highest among those who readily make the claim that God put them together to start with.....that's the issue. It's not about being put together by our father. Our father "sanctifies" the marriage and or "recognizes" the marriage. Marriage is there so that we can spend eternity with each other. It's not just about joining together on this earth. We have to search for this person ourselves. Again God doesn't assemble the two people. It's not like God has us go out on a blind date with each other and we either marry to join together for eternity or loose one another, no it's not that way. We have to sear and find the person we can be with for eternity ourselves. And God will sanctify the marriage, recognize the marriage so that we may remain married in heaven. ![]() Wow, thank you friend. I had not put all this together. That would explain why it is said "till death do us part". Marriage is only here on earth, again I thank you my friend for asking these questions. I find this very interesting to have found this out tonight. I was just pondering on if our spouse passes away and we can remarry, who then we would be married to in heaven. But this clarifies that question for me. We would be married to neither, for in heaven there is no marriage. Thanks to you too, Sir. I enjoyed every bit of your contributions and have learned a lot from you too. |
|
|
|
Topic:
Home Wreckers Award
|
|
I don't mean to ignite a race war here at all, but just to initiate intense discussion. One of my Professors believe that Black girls are better home wreckers than White girls. She is a black woman. She thought Latina women are subservient or more submissive. But again she warned me: Hey Sam, before you gallop down the alley to that White girl's door, be sure you already bought you a burial spot at the nearest cemetry because ever since O.J., they've decided to kill you first and weep at your grave later. OMG! And I was like, Prof., so who do I hook up with after this scare session. She goes: go with the moment. Now I'm in a dilemma-it's called Sam's limbo. What do you all think? there that is my proof. Ok, I got your point!! |
|
|
|
Topic:
Home Wreckers Award
|
|
plenty. ....well, come on with 'em. I'm curious ![]() |
|
|
|
A friend of mine pretty much had to be told what to do so his wife proposed to him ... sorta ... kinda told him what was gonna happen. It seemed to work out ok. Awesome....hope the "what to do" wasn't some kind of spell or voodoo...? ![]() |
|
|
|
God doesn't join two people in that essence. We are to find someone we can love. "There's someone for everyone" is sort of a myth. There is if you wish to make it that way, but automatically it isn't that way. In marriage God merely recognizes the request to be joined with one another. He doesn't "instigate" it. Great perspective! How about in societies or communities that neither believes in nor accept "God" as an authority. They equally marry - who does the recognizing thing you refer to - which kind of validates the choice? My perspective it wouldn't hold much at all. For it wasn't sanctified by our father. It's by God's authority that we do become as one flesh to enjoy each other for eternity, so with it not being set out before our father I do not believe he would sanctify it. ...so what happens when the marriage, supposedly "sanctified by the father" bitterly dissolves? How do we then define the ascribed sanctification? Presumably, whatever the Lord does shall be permanent. When impermanence results, whose act/choice is impugned? There technically isn't anything as a "divorce". The bible specifically says let no man put asunder what the father has joined. But, if one of the spouses cheats on the other, the marriage becomes obsolete. The only way to be completely absolved from the marriage is for one of the spouses to have passed away on earth. Marriages will ONLY work if both spouses push it to work. It working is through the actions the two takes towards each other through their life together. The father doesn't take our free will away therefore does not stop such from happening even though he's sanctified the marriage. Well well, here I beg to differ with you a bit. There is such a thing as "divorce" - ideally and really. It is as old as the human race and has been practiced in traditional and theocratic societies before ever Abraham was born. Yes, the Bible forbids divorce in cases of "what GOD JOINED TOGETHER" so the question is, how many marriages can confidently claim that GOD PUT them together. Being put together by God is different from being put together by a priest or pastor, etc. God sees the end from the begining, so if he puts together something he already foresaw breaking apart, then that raises question as to the wisdom. But knowing that it is impossible to overturn God's purpose, I am of the view that if God himself put a marriage together, no matter what, it will succeed. But then, the world is not a theocracy. My issue is that the rate of divorce is highest among those who readily make the claim that God put them together to start with.....that's the issue. It's not about being put together by our father. Our father "sanctifies" the marriage and or "recognizes" the marriage. Marriage is there so that we can spend eternity with each other. It's not just about joining together on this earth. We have to search for this person ourselves. Again God doesn't assemble the two people. It's not like God has us go out on a blind date with each other and we either marry to join together for eternity or loose one another, no it's not that way. We have to sear and find the person we can be with for eternity ourselves. And God will sanctify the marriage, recognize the marriage so that we may remain married in heaven. ![]() |
|
|
|
God doesn't join two people in that essence. We are to find someone we can love. "There's someone for everyone" is sort of a myth. There is if you wish to make it that way, but automatically it isn't that way. In marriage God merely recognizes the request to be joined with one another. He doesn't "instigate" it. Great perspective! How about in societies or communities that neither believes in nor accept "God" as an authority. They equally marry - who does the recognizing thing you refer to - which kind of validates the choice? My perspective it wouldn't hold much at all. For it wasn't sanctified by our father. It's by God's authority that we do become as one flesh to enjoy each other for eternity, so with it not being set out before our father I do not believe he would sanctify it. You can look at it this way. In this world marriages are only considered marriages if it's through the court system, in America. So if two people were to go through the marriage ceremony and all but not present it before the government, they would not recognize it as a marriage and or sanctify it as a marriage if you will. Uhmmm.....not really, most states recognize traditional marriages in which lovers just live together and produce kids... Yes but for the state to recognize it there has to be a marriage licence between the two. Which is where the court comes in. ...no Sir. In traditional marriage states, the elements are totally separate from that of civil marriages. No license whatsoever is required - some require only that the couple live together for specified number of years and that friends and family recognize them as couple.Thats it. Ok I was not aware of that. Anyhow, if the marriage isn't presented before our father done by a preacher then how would it be sanctified by our father? That marriage of which we're speaking of is only deemed married because of living together for a certain length of time, it's not presented before the father. Ok, how about where there are no preachers or priests? Is the father not universal in authority and omnipresent in scope? I'm wondering if you believe that moslem, hindu, buddhist marriages are not divine? If they are done before the one and only father, then yes they are sanctified. Awesome! Thanks for sharing intelligently on this topic, Sir. |
|
|
|
Sir I am not attacking you im sorry you see my view of points offensive Its ok Sir, let's focus on the topic and whatever opinion you wish to share. I am very much interested in what everyone has to say - I'm sory too. Not offended at all. |
|
|