Women Traded Cooking and Cleaning for Blowjobs
Ever wonder why the only place you can get a home cooked, fresh baked apple pie these days is at Marie Calendar’s or at your grandmother’s house?
It’s because during a movement called “Women’s Liberation”, women traded cooking and cleaning for blowjobs
Does anyone also remember when men worldwide exchanged being the sole breadwinner of the house for listening to their woman’s endless screed of woman problems?
No, no one does. That’s because it never happened.
Men don’t operate like that. All of us work on one principle: always going up and always going faster — and better whenever possible, which to a man is all the time. That means we don’t get to trade shit we don’t want to do for things like are easier, like how today’s modern, “liberated” women traded cooking and cleaning for blowjobs.
How typical of the laziness of the female species. When men are requested to do something in addition to what they’re already doing, they just say, “Well I guess I better do that then.” Then they fucking do it.
Women, however, ration their time out in bits and pieces like it was worth half a damn in the first place. The whole thing is amateur and childish, really. Imagine if men worked that way. When we men invented farming and agriculture, we would have just stopped hunting all together and became a veganous species of some kind.
Would you like from fries with your Big Mac? No, because there’s no such thing as a Big Mac in a world without meat. And that’s exactly what we would have if women ran the show. No meat, just a bunch of aimless dreams and junior high grab-ass horseshit.
Related Articles:
Pages: « 29 … 17 16 15 14 13 [12] 11 10 9 8 7 … 1 » Show All
Cooking tends to favor men in a physical sense. Make no joke about it, that is demanding work. One of my kenpo students is a chef. It is not that he made fried chicken it is that he made fried chicken for 300. Apparently “tong hand” sets in at about 100. The next 200 are just perseverence.
Ever watch Iron Chef? those boys are moving, and they are only cooking for 5 or 6.
By way of establishing ethos here, I once did grad level biochem work.
On woman in particular when asked, why this field, would respond with “I like the colors.” And she had an eye for colors like no one I have ever met since. She could match color and then recreate that same shade later from memory in paint. She couldn’t see in the dark to save her life though. A genetic rod/cone issue I’m sure. It may sound like a flipant answer but for her it rang true.
A lot of the work is done on the micro level. I remember breaking down 20lbs of kidney’s to get 200micro grams of a dilute protein. Spilling that little jar will ruin your whole week. Eventually that is what drove me nuts. The fine motor skill requirement, repetitive tasks, listening to women, and dealing with tiny samples. I could only run a micropipeter about 10,000 times without resorting to a violent suicide. The women I worked with seemed to have no problem with the repetitive issues. A quarter of their mind on task and the rest just chatting away about the latest with Brad Pitt et al etc etc et-freaking-cetera.
After my experience with biochem the 10% number of female patent holders in chemistry just jumped out at me. Not that it was so high but why is it so low? If there is ever a field made for women to outperform physically this is it. Of course that little p-chem class can be tad challenging.
How gutless. Rather than insult me in a drive by why don’t you act with a bit of integrity and state what it is that you find so offensive my comments? Let me guess, calling men, permanent sluts? Kind of like how you and the boys here like to call females, whores or “wymen” or whatever other pathetic name you can come up with.
It’s goofy, but I think there could be something to the ‘cooking’ analogy. (On the other hand men do seem to make the best chefs… yet women seem somewhat more drawn to doing it).
Heck, Margaret Thatcher was a chemist IIRC. I’ve an aunt who wanted to go into it back in the early 60’s (decided not to after struggling with physics) so clearly it wasn’t entirely inconceivable for women to tread that path back then.
I hate to bring up Curie (the talisman-like figure every crazy woman on this site invokes), but Irene Joliot-Curie did share the Nobel for chemistry in the 30’s. To say nothing of her mother Marie who’s work was classified as physics but today likely would be classified as chemistry.
So maybe they were role models. (And bad ones. Apart from dying of radiation poisoning, Irene’s radiation-poisoned brain lead her to feminism and communism. But popular, and women love that. Their never-ceasing invocation of the Curie name testifies to that.)
Yep. Gilbreth was certainly something. Unlike the Curies, I’ve nothing but respect for her. And she was going strong back in the 1910’s and 20’s, so could easily have influenced a significant demographic cohort of pre-feminist women.
-wolfe
Role models is a good suggestion also. From what I understand, Lillian Gibreth was very influential in the area of engineering and management. Fascinating lady. No doubt her success in the past might influence a lot of young intelligent women to enter the field.
Yet like Wolfe, I cannot say I know a lot by the way of Chemistry - or indeed why it would be an attractive discipline for women. Unless there is a certain aspect in particular which best suits they ways in which women work?
I wouldn’t utterly discount role models. I’m stumped on chemistry (though Luka’s suggestion isn’t bad). However, for industrial designs and plant (assuming you mean production, not relating to green leafy things) patents, these could be due to things like the influence of Lillian Gilbreth. (real-life mother from ‘Cheaper by the Dozen’; ignore the atrocious movie with Steve Martin).
-wolfe
ok all you pin heads who are laughing at me…
i’m laughing at your for laughing at me!
luka, people in glass attention whore houses shouldn’t throw stones - it appears that your attempt to correct my spelling error pertaining to amygdala was in vain.
and finally, people, men, and women, attack what they don’t understand.
it’s just easier - it’s a product of the hardwiring in the limbic system - repetitve behaviors, and rewards.
in this case, primitive, rabid attacks, with the explosion of its attendant, speedy neurochemicals, and the resulting relief and satisfaction that winds up this intolerable emotional overload.
so, realize, boys and girls, that when you are doing this, you’re really no better than a programmed automoton, at the total whim of your base, animal impulses.
the only apparent difference, is your straining grasp at the medium of expression for your outraged narcicism - words.
the more you find pleasure doing this - and make no mistake, you find pleasure in doing this, the more you will do it.
the more you do it, the less capable you will be of learning new tricks of dealing with/expressing anger, and really the less capable you’ll be of experiencing pleasure on a more human, and less animal level.
consider yourself shaken, not stirred.
Bloody matriarchal oppressors.
-Big Al
I have an answer to your question: money.
Pharmaceutical companies make bucket loads- and women (or so I hear) are particularly fond of their health and of healthcare. It makes sense to me (although there could be other reasons of course)
Patent statistics
In 1988, the percentage of patents for inventions granted to women resident in the USA had reached 5.16%. It was larger when it came to plant patents: 6.92%, or industrial designs: 9.49%.
I am not sure to be honest, biff. I wasn’t aware that the highest number of new female patent holders were in chemistry… could you give a few examples?
If more women were like Enya, Supergirl, Luka, or Arielle there probably wouldn’t need to be a site like this. Anywho…
My question is why are the highest number of new female patent holders in chemistry? Is there something about the field of chemistry that women are attracted to? Is it the relation to cooking? Maybe for the few women that haven’t traded cooking for bj’s this is a field to stretch intellectually?
LMAO. I wouldn’t go that far Big Al!
If I did get nominated for Honorary Man of the Month Award I wouldn’t know whether to bitch-slap Dick or thank him ;oP
But seriously, I only posted it on here because I found it amusing as an observation that I knew you guys may understand rather than to get a pat on the back for it.
You trying for an Honorary Man of the Month award, Luka?
-Big Al
Anyway - back on topic. I believe we were talking about inventions and the fact that men invent more than women on the whole? What point were we at before the discussion was so rudely interrupted?
Indeed.
-wolfe
Go, girl!
-Big Al
Perhaps you are right astromuffy. My communication skills are clearly terrible compared to yours in a feminist environment.
Maybe the wimmin on feministing.com would have understood me better if I wrote like you:
1. No paragraphs
2. No capital letters at the beginning of sentences
3. Sentences that finish with a comma not a fullstop
4. Atrocious spelling
5. Long winded explanations
6. Illogical, irrational and circular arguments
7. Ad-hominem attacks and other logical fallacies.
Damn, I have so much to unlearn with regards to having a conversation with fellow women, it would seem.
Muffy, PLEASE just back away from the computer! These men are not laughing with you, they are laughing at you. Are you trying to prove that you are an idiot? It’s embarrassing, juvenile and definately not funny.
luka says:
“I have managed to get myself banned from feministing.com - quite amusing.”
see what i said about comunication skills?
it IS funny!!
ha ha ha ha ha