BarrileteCosmico wrote:

Pedram wrote:IPSOS exitpoll:

VVD(31)

CDA(19)

D66(19)

PVV(19)

GroenLinks(16)

SP(14)

PvdA(9)

CU(6)

PvdD(5)

50Plus(4)

Denk(3)

SGP(3)

Forum voor Democratie(2)

Amazing how many viable parties they have, no wonder Wilders seemed like such a threat

Unique wrote:“I am so proud at what has happened and happy that we have been given the trust again” by voters, Tamara van Ark, campaign leader of Rutte’s liberal VVD party said. With France and Germany facing elections in the months ahead, Rutte hoped to slow the momentum of what he called the “wrong sort of populism” after last’s year British vote to leave the European Union and the election of U.S. President Donald Trump.

what is the wrong sort of populism

The populism they don't agree with, duh

I get that but what is wrong with it. how is it they see it as wrong populism and not other peoples opinion on what they want in life. I mean its very easy to tell people what they should find popular when you are a rich politician that has private health care. private schooling for your kids. a nice big house that's protected by private security. and plenty of money so your family will never be affected by any of the problems that the average person will face.

Natalie Portman wrote:
3- Make nuclear family making trendy and cool again. Stop public funding for university programs of gender studies + 3rd wave feminism, etc that shame nuclear family building and indoctrinate young women into thinking having a husband and loving children is some sort of evil oppression and sign of patriarchy etc.

But its NOT trendy and its NOT cool. Having kids sucks. Point blank. That is why when given a true choice woman don't opt for it. Giving up your health, and career, to house a parasite(not to be rude, but thats what it is) for the better part of a year, and have a net drain on you financially for 2+ decades afterwards, is a bum deal.  The smarter women are, the more likely they are to see it.

Opting for Children means a woman is outright accepting a lower quality of life in the developed world.She's giving up a career,dreams,and many other things a guy isnt by having the same. Women know its a bum deal. The only women who accept it are those without such ambition on their own, those who are brainwashed by their own family norms, or the true poor who expects the state to foot the bill for their own life choices. What separates the first and third world today are women who have the ability to take their destiny in their own hands.

Betty La Fea wrote:

Natalie Portman wrote:
3- Make nuclear family making trendy and cool again. Stop public funding for university programs of gender studies + 3rd wave feminism, etc that shame nuclear family building and indoctrinate young women into thinking having a husband and loving children is some sort of evil oppression and sign of patriarchy etc.

But its NOT trendy and its NOT cool. Having kids sucks. Point blank. That is why when given a true choice woman don't opt for it. Giving up your health, and career, to house a parasite(not to be rude, but thats what it is) for the better part of a year, and have a net drain on you financially for 2+ decades afterwards, is a bum deal.  The smarter women are, the more likely they are to see it.

Opting for Children means a woman is outright accepting a lower quality of life in the developed world.She's giving up a career,dreams,and many other things a guy isnt by having the same. Women know its a bum deal. The only women who accept it are those without such ambition on their own, those who are brainwashed by their own family norms, or the true poor who expects the state to foot the bill for their own life choices. What separates the first and third world today are women who have the ability to take their destiny in their own hands.

having kids sucks. kids are a parasite. Opting for Children means a woman is outright accepting a lower quality of life.  She's giving up a career,dreams,and many other things a guy isnt by having the same. that sounds like a woman that follows a religion. and you sound like a bit of a idiot.

Unique wrote:

Betty La Fea wrote:

Natalie Portman wrote:
3- Make nuclear family making trendy and cool again. Stop public funding for university programs of gender studies + 3rd wave feminism, etc that shame nuclear family building and indoctrinate young women into thinking having a husband and loving children is some sort of evil oppression and sign of patriarchy etc.

But its NOT trendy and its NOT cool. Having kids sucks. Point blank. That is why when given a true choice woman don't opt for it. Giving up your health, and career, to house a parasite(not to be rude, but thats what it is) for the better part of a year, and have a net drain on you financially for 2+ decades afterwards, is a bum deal.  The smarter women are, the more likely they are to see it.

Opting for Children means a woman is outright accepting a lower quality of life in the developed world.She's giving up a career,dreams,and many other things a guy isnt by having the same. Women know its a bum deal. The only women who accept it are those without such ambition on their own, those who are brainwashed by their own family norms, or the true poor who expects the state to foot the bill for their own life choices. What separates the first and third world today are women who have the ability to take their destiny in their own hands.

having kids sucks. kids are a parasite. Opting for Children means a woman is outright accepting a lower quality of life.  She's giving up a career,dreams,and many other things a guy isnt by having the same. that sounds like a woman that follows a religion. and you sound like a bit of a idiot.

Of course I sound like an idiot to you. You are of an older generation, and a man.

You wouldnt give up your career, a year of your health, your earnings, to house something inside of you that makes it so your back hurts, that your appetite changes, that will change your body forever all just so that you can have a net drain on your household for 2+ decades. Yet we expect our sisters, and girlfriends, and daughters to do all of this for what? So that our nation doesnt become swamped by Brown people? So that we can have our ego stroked by having a son to create in our image as we try to play god over another life? Its a bum deal. I want more from my sisters, my cousins, my aunts, my Girlfriend. I want them to grab life by the balls and attack it the way I did. I want them to have the CHOICE.

Also if you disagree with what I say then why is there an inverse relationship between intelligence and fertility?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertility_and_intelligence

Why, when given opportunity, do women not opt to be our baby factories? Barefoot in a kitchen making us food for the duration of their life? Don't you want more of them?

Betty La Fea wrote:

Unique wrote:

Betty La Fea wrote:


But its NOT trendy and its NOT cool. Having kids sucks. Point blank. That is why when given a true choice woman don't opt for it. Giving up your health, and career, to house a parasite(not to be rude, but thats what it is) for the better part of a year, and have a net drain on you financially for 2+ decades afterwards, is a bum deal.  The smarter women are, the more likely they are to see it.

Opting for Children means a woman is outright accepting a lower quality of life in the developed world.She's giving up a career,dreams,and many other things a guy isnt by having the same. Women know its a bum deal. The only women who accept it are those without such ambition on their own, those who are brainwashed by their own family norms, or the true poor who expects the state to foot the bill for their own life choices. What separates the first and third world today are women who have the ability to take their destiny in their own hands.

having kids sucks. kids are a parasite. Opting for Children means a woman is outright accepting a lower quality of life.  She's giving up a career,dreams,and many other things a guy isnt by having the same. that sounds like a woman that follows a religion. and you sound like a bit of a idiot.

Of course I sound like an idiot to you. You are of an older generation, and a man.

You wouldnt give up your career, a year of your health, your earnings, to house something inside of you that makes it so your back hurts, that your appetite changes, that will change your body forever all just so that you can have a net drain on your household for 2+ decades. Yet we expect our sisters, and girlfriends, and daughters to do all of this for what? So that our nation doesnt become swamped by Brown people? So that we can have our ego stroked by having a son to create in our image as we try to play god over another life? Its a bum deal. I want more from my sisters, my cousins, my aunts, my Girlfriend. I want them to grab life by the balls and attack it the way I did. I want them to have the CHOICE.

Also if you disagree with what I say then why is there an inverse relationship between intelligence and fertility?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertility_and_intelligence

Why, when given opportunity, do women not opt to be our baby factories? Barefoot in a kitchen making us food for the duration of their life? Don't you want more of them?

my wife loves children. she is the best mother in the world. she had children with me because she wanted children. I love my wife and I love my children and we both work together.  I work to make money that we all need and she looks after the house and kids something that us men could never do. women rule this world not men. its mother earth and mother nature. if I died tomorrow my wife would be fine without me. if I lost my wife I wouldent last a year. I don't treat my wife as a slave and a baby making factory only crack pot religious men do that. my kids are not parasites and they don't lower the quality of my wifes life. we have a great life and we both work hard for our family. she works far harder than me and that's why I respect her more than anyone on earth. the only woman that give up there life to make babys are the ones that are miss treated by crackpot religious husbands. if you really want to look at who treats women like shit I'm sure you know where to look.

Unique wrote:
my wife loves children.

I'm sure she does.

Unique wrote:she is the best mother in the world.

I'm sure she is.

Unique wrote:she had children with me because she wanted children.

Or was it because that was the role society placed on her from the time she could remember? On my girlfriend's desk in her room is a picture of her as a toddler holding a baby doll. This is what we give girls, while we give boys toy trucks and footballs. Of course these things stick with us throughout life.

Unique wrote:I love my wife and I love my children and we both work together.  I work to make money that we all need and she looks after the house and kids something that us men could never do. women rule this world not men. its mother earth and mother nature. if I died tomorrow my wife would be fine without me. if I lost my wife I wouldent last a year. I don't treat my wife as a slave and a baby making factory only crack pot religious men do that. my kids are not parasites and they don't lower the quality of my wifes life. we have a great life and we both work hard for our family. she works far harder than me and that's why I respect her more than anyone on earth. the only woman that give up there life to make babys are the ones that are miss treated by crackpot religious husbands. if you really want to look at who treats women like shit I'm sure you know where to look.

No doubt you love your wife, and I would never question that, but lets get real no girl born in the developed world, from an enlightened culture, sits back and says:

"You know when I grow up I want to marry a bloke and spend the rest of my life cooking his food and giving up my health growing his mini-me's inside of me"

Thats just not the way we raise kids now. We teach kids to dream, thats a hallmark of the way we live now. You know how amazing it is for women to dream? How specifically now it is? Women in many places throughout the world cant even imagine such an existence. A world where they can control their destiny, they are always just sitting around waiting for a man. Its a sad existence. Here is a thought exercise to try on your wife next time you two are alone. Ask her:

"When you were a little girl, what did you dream of being?"

Before asking her could you guess how she would answer?

Betty La Fea wrote:

Unique wrote:
my wife loves children.

I'm sure she does.

Unique wrote:she is the best mother in the world.

I'm sure she is.

Unique wrote:she had children with me because she wanted children.

Or was it because that was the role society placed on her from the time she could remember? On my girlfriend's desk in her room is a picture of her as a toddler holding a baby doll. This is what we give girls, while we give boys toy trucks and footballs. Of course these things stick with us throughout life.

Unique wrote:I love my wife and I love my children and we both work together.  I work to make money that we all need and she looks after the house and kids something that us men could never do. women rule this world not men. its mother earth and mother nature. if I died tomorrow my wife would be fine without me. if I lost my wife I wouldent last a year. I don't treat my wife as a slave and a baby making factory only crack pot religious men do that. my kids are not parasites and they don't lower the quality of my wifes life. we have a great life and we both work hard for our family. she works far harder than me and that's why I respect her more than anyone on earth. the only woman that give up there life to make babys are the ones that are miss treated by crackpot religious husbands. if you really want to look at who treats women like shit I'm sure you know where to look.

No doubt you love your wife, and I would never question that, but lets get real no girl born in the developed world, from an enlightened culture, sits back and says:

"You know when I grow up I want to marry a bloke and spend the rest of my life cooking his food and giving up my health growing his mini-me's inside of me"

Thats just not the way we raise kids now. We teach kids to dream, thats a hallmark of the way we live now. You know how amazing it is for women to dream? How specifically now it is? Women in many places throughout the world cant even imagine such an existence. A world where they can control their destiny, they are always just sitting around waiting for a man. Its a sad existence. Here is a thought exercise to try on your wife next time you two are alone. Ask her:

"When you were a little girl, what did you dream of being?"

Before asking her could you guess how she would answer?

I'm not sure what your saying tbh. it sounds like your saying my wife has had to give up her rights and her life to be my wife and the mother of my children.

Unique wrote:I'm not sure what your saying tbh. it sounds like your saying my wife has had to give up her rights and her life to be my wife and the mother of my children.

Not her rights, but definitely her life and dreams. Unless her dream was solely to be the mother and food maker to a bloke and his kids. Then perhaps that would be a failing of western civilization.

Betty La Fea wrote:

Unique wrote:I'm not sure what your saying tbh. it sounds like your saying my wife has had to give up her rights and her life to be my wife and the mother of my children.

Not her rights, but definitely her life and dreams. Unless her dream was solely to be the mother and food maker to a bloke and his kids. Then perhaps that would be a failing of western civilization.

so your saying all women give up her life and dreams to be a mother.

Unique wrote:

Betty La Fea wrote:

Unique wrote:I'm not sure what your saying tbh. it sounds like your saying my wife has had to give up her rights and her life to be my wife and the mother of my children.

Not her rights, but definitely her life and dreams. Unless her dream was solely to be the mother and food maker to a bloke and his kids. Then perhaps that would be a failing of western civilization.

so your saying all women give up her life and dreams to be a mother.

Not necessarily, but in a western context where boys and girls are raised together a woman becoming a homemaker is almost certainly giving up her dreams because we teach our kids, and girls by extension, to aspire to be more.

Lets say in a culture where women are not with boys, and taught things completely different. Then it is completely normal for them to aspire to be homemakers, but that isnt how we live now. Girls in the west are raised next to boys, who are taught they can be anything. This, by extension, tells girls they can be anything. Boys aren't lining up to be homemakers, and neither are girls. Many girls feel they have to take this role though, and that is an issue. It robs them of a destiny in my eyes.

Betty La Fea wrote:

Unique wrote:

Betty La Fea wrote:


Not her rights, but definitely her life and dreams. Unless her dream was solely to be the mother and food maker to a bloke and his kids. Then perhaps that would be a failing of western civilization.

so your saying all women give up her life and dreams to be a mother.

Not necessarily, but in a western context where boys and girls are raised together a woman becoming a homemaker is almost certainly giving up her dreams because we teach our kids, and girls by extension, to aspire to be more.

Lets say in a culture where women are not with boys, and taught things completely different. Then it is completely normal for them to aspire to be homemakers, but that isnt how we live now. Girls in the west are raised next to boys, who are taught they can be anything. This, by extension, tells girls they can be anything. Boys aren't lining up to be homemakers, and neither are girls. Many girls feel they have to take this role though, and that is an issue. It robs them of a destiny in my eyes.

girls in the west can chose if they want to be mothers or home makers as you say. but sadly girls in middle east cant. I treat my wife like a queen because she is a queen in my eyes. if you are looking to speak up for womans rights then don't talk to me. talk to the real abusers of womans rights. and every man and his dog knows who you need to talk to

Unique wrote:

Betty La Fea wrote:

Unique wrote:
so your saying all women give up her life and dreams to be a mother.

Not necessarily, but in a western context where boys and girls are raised together a woman becoming a homemaker is almost certainly giving up her dreams because we teach our kids, and girls by extension, to aspire to be more.

Lets say in a culture where women are not with boys, and taught things completely different. Then it is completely normal for them to aspire to be homemakers, but that isnt how we live now. Girls in the west are raised next to boys, who are taught they can be anything. This, by extension, tells girls they can be anything. Boys aren't lining up to be homemakers, and neither are girls. Many girls feel they have to take this role though, and that is an issue. It robs them of a destiny in my eyes.

girls in the west can chose if they want to be mothers or home makers as you say. but sadly girls in middle east cant. I treat my wife like a queen because she is a queen in my eyes. if you are looking to speak up for womans rights then don't talk to me. talk to the real abusers of womans rights. and every man and his dog knows who you need to talk to

Yet you have your wife living the exact same way the "Real" abusers have their wives. In a home, barefoot, in the kitchen making food for you and your kids. Whether its her choice or not the results are the same, and on the inside that is disappointing for all of us.

Now I am not judging, hell, my girlfriend cant speak any English and is becoming increasingly insistent on us "Making it official" so she will probably be in the same spot as your wife. Doesn't make it any easier for me to accept though.

Why are women making such choices, in the west, but not men? Would you ever give up your dreams or career to stay at home and make your wives food? For the rest of your life? A woman who does this is definitely a queen, but the issue is there shouldn't be pressure to do this. Even with a "choice" in the west there is still societal pressure.

Holland

Dat sneak diss on Brexit & US

Fully behind @Unique in the politics section what a day this is

Betty you are just projecting your own preference on kids on everyone else. People are different and like different things. It is entirely reasonable for women to want kids or not and for men to want kids or not. Why do you assume that men don't wanna make sacrifices for kids? it just sounds like you don't. Plenty of people do. It doesn't make them any less "enlightened". And a 'financial drain'? who gives a shit. Life is more than money, let people live it as they find it most fulfilling.

rincon wrote:Fully behind @Unique in the politics section what a day this is

Betty you are just projecting your own preference on kids on everyone else. People are different and like different things. It is entirely reasonable for women to want kids or not and for men to want kids or not. Why do you assume that men don't wanna make sacrifices for kids? it just sounds like you don't. Plenty of people do. It doesn't make them any less "enlightened". And a 'financial drain'? who gives a shit. Life is more than money, let people live it as they find it most fulfilling.

Of course men make sacrifices for their kids, but society never puts the onus on them to give up EVERYTHING for them. A woman, who raised in the west, decides to sit at home all day cooking and being a baby-making factory for her husband is giving up a lot more. If she is raised up next to boys who are told they can be anything, and chase their dreams, then their dreams are most certainly not to be at home,barefoot, making food the rest of their lives. They settle, but the question remains why are they expected to settle in this way but not a man?

And people who know how liberating economic freedom is knows how much of an issue a financial drain is. Money is one of the leading, if not the most, cause for divorce in my country today. People always stressed about not having money, and the burdens that come with it. Mostly because they live above their means, and the means would be a lot lower if there wasn't extra mouths to feed, and massively lower if a woman was not expected to give up her prime career dreams and aspirations for months at a time to grow another person in them.

I can even see the appeal of this, because really we get the sweet end of the deal. A woman to you know, stay at home and do the chores I don't want to do, cook for me, and then give up her health for the better part of a year carrying my mini-me to term. Why would this be seen as trendy or cool by a woman raised by her brothers who are taught to conquer the world?

Pedram wrote:

Betty La Fea wrote:

Unique wrote:I'm not sure what your saying tbh. it sounds like your saying my wife has had to give up her rights and her life to be my wife and the mother of my children.

Not her rights, but definitely her life and dreams. Unless her dream was solely to be the mother and food maker to a bloke and his kids. Then perhaps that would be a failing of western civilization.

Insane projection bias here, you're assuming every women considers having children as a burden in her life which is completely false, and what does this discussion have anything to do with western civilization?

By the way i'm glad people like you and other third wave feminists are only a tiny fraction of the world's population, you people have some really radical views on life.

Not every woman, just the women who were raised next to boys in the west who are taught they can be anything and to grab life by the horns.

I don't think we are a small of population as you think. Go to a hospital in America today, walk up to a buy holding his newborn daughter, and say "One day your baby girl is going to be sitting at home all day taking care of some bloke's kid for the rest of her life" and see the reaction you get. I feel like it takes viewing it as his daughter,sister, or niece is a good way to see a viewpoint of why societal expectations is such a burden on women when it comes to giving up a life to continue on a guy's lineage, because really that is what it is. My parents didnt get married until I was damn near 10, yet I have never ever ever ever ever used my mother's last name on anything. It was never even a consideration because a kid is his fathers even though a woman gives up a year and her health to create it.

Women, who have been educated, know this is a bum deal in most cases. They aren't stupid, and you don't want to create a society where a bunch of smart women start realizing they are getting the bum deal at life because it creates issues. Look at japan now. The population has shrunk by over a million since the start of this decade because more and more women recognize that giving it all up to carry on some other guy's lineage is a bad deal. Not only that, but there is a growing resentment at this. If we continue to give women a bad deal this will spread.

So to summarize, you've had some experiences growing up and you project them onto everyone in the western world.

rincon wrote:So to summarize, you've had some experiences growing up and you project them onto everyone in the western world.

Would you give up your career right now to stay at home and raise a bloke's child?

Well done, Dutch voters.

Now I hope the French, and later, ze Germans follow suit.
The European project is what has brought the most extended period of peace for Europe ever, I really hope it is continued in a wholesome, and thorough manner. And the most recent elections and polls really do give hope on that front.



Edit: On Betty v Unique on kids: I think if every working bloke thought of his wife and kids as Unique does, Betty wouldn't feel the need to make those points; if people like Betty had their way, men who love their wives as much as Unique does, wouldn't really care about it, since they already respect their wives.
But Betty has to realize that some women actually do want kids as their "career", and Unique has to realize that a whole shit-ton of men don't treat their women as good as he does.

Betty La Fea wrote:

rincon wrote:So to summarize, you've had some experiences growing up and you project them onto everyone in the western world.

Would you give up your career right now to stay at home and raise a bloke's child?

Right off the bat you are wrong. Its not "some bloke's child" its your child. If you don't see yourself as your mother's kid and you don't use her last name or whatever, then that's your own thing.

Would I do it right now? No. Not because I'm a man, but because I'm not trying to have kids yet, neither is my girlfriend. When we are ready, in a few years, then we'll do it. I'll be just as involved as she is too, no doubt about it.

VivaStPauli wrote:
Edit: On Betty v Unique on kids: I think if every working bloke thought of his wife and kids as Unique does, Betty wouldn't feel the need to make those points; if people like Betty had their way, men who love their wives as much as Unique does, wouldn't really care about it, since they already respect their wives.
But Betty has to realize that some women actually do want kids as their "career", and Unique has to realize that a whole shit-ton of men don't treat their women as good as he does.

I don't doubt there are women who want kids as a career, I just think many are typecasted and placed in that role by society. Girls are given baby dolls to play with. The burden of expectation is placed on them to play that role early in society.

rincon wrote:

Betty La Fea wrote:

rincon wrote:So to summarize, you've had some experiences growing up and you project them onto everyone in the western world.

Would you give up your career right now to stay at home and raise a bloke's child?

Right off the bat you are wrong. Its not "some bloke's child" its your child. If you don't see yourself as your mother's kid and you don't use her last name or whatever, then that's your own thing.

Would I do it right now? No. Not because I'm a man, but because I'm not trying to have kids yet, neither is my girlfriend. When we are ready, in a few years, then we'll do it. I'll be just as involved as she is too, no doubt about it.

Of course its your child too, but look at how it is set up in society. The kid gets the father's last name as it is his lineage been passed on. I am 100% my mothers child, hell she made the decision on her own to have me and I didnt live with my dad at all until they got married after he finished college and got a job. The true issue is that the heritage isnt passed down that way. Off the top of your head right now could you tell me your mothers last name(Although I suspect you guys keep better track of this in latin America so I will amend this to say your mother's mother last name)? It becomes a complete non-factor in the make up of the child identification-wise. This is textbook patriarchy, and women are expected to give up their life to pass on another guy's lineage. I grew up in my grandmothers house and right now I can tell you honestly, and with shame, if I saw her family name in front of me right now I wouldnt know it from the stray dog I see on the street. This is the woman who raised me. Its a disgrace really.

As far as the kid thing goes I don't think you would give up your career in the future to raise her kids either. I don't think you would because that burden of expectation isnt placed on men. You are taught, I assume, like the rest of us to go out there and make your mark on the world. Your girlfriend if raised in the west was probably taught this right next to you. The difference is society expectation is going to come raining down on her if she doesnt submit to such role.

Betty La Fea wrote:
Of course its your child too, but look at how it is set up in society. The kid gets the father's last name as it is his lineage been passed on.

In your country.

Betty La Fea wrote:
I am 100% my mothers child, hell she made the decision on her own to have me and I didnt live with my dad at all until they got married after he finished college and got a job. The true issue is that the heritage isnt passed down that way. Off the top of your head right now could you tell me your mothers last name(Although I suspect you guys keep better track of this in latin America so I will amend this to say your mother's mother last name)?

WAT

Who doesn't know their mother's last name? lmao. Of course I know it off the top of my head. And yes, of course I know the last name of my gandma, both of them.

Betty La Fea wrote:
It becomes a complete non-factor in the make up of the child identification-wise.

In your country.

Betty La Fea wrote:
This is textbook patriarchy, and women are expected to give up their life to pass on another guy's lineage. I grew up in my grandmothers house and right now I can tell you honestly, and with shame, if I saw her family name in front of me right now I wouldnt know it from the stray dog I see on the street. This is the woman who raised me. Its a disgrace really.

Again, this is your family's thing. You are projecting your own experience on everyone.

Betty La Fea wrote:
As far as the kid thing goes I don't think you would give up your career in the future to raise her kids either. I don't think you would because that burden of expectation isnt placed on men. You are taught, I assume, like the rest of us to go out there and make your mark on the world. Your girlfriend if raised in the west was probably taught this right next to you. The difference is society expectation is going to come raining down on her if she doesnt submit to such role.

All of this is wrong. All. The assumption that I wouldn't make the same sacrifices as my gf. The assumption that my gf is expected to not have a career. That society would shun her. All of it.

You are taking your own life and projecting it on everyone.

Without double checking, I'm pretty sure women in Norway have higher education on average than men. My gf has a masters and works on her field, just like I do. Her mom and sister are proffessional as well, both have 3 kids.

I, as everyone else in latin america, carry both last names and we ALL now our grandmother's name. Its in my ID, my license, etc. My passport (Italy) has both parents last names too. In brazil and portugal, like in Norway too, the mother's last name comes first.

All of the women in my generation in my extended family work and have college, some advanced too, degrees. Hell, 3 of my 4 bosses are women (here in central europe) and 2 of those 3 have kids.

Don't push your own bias on people.

rincon wrote:

All of this is wrong. All. The assumption that I wouldn't make the same sacrifices as my gf. The assumption that my gf is expected to not have a career. That society would shun her. All of it.

You are taking your own life and projecting it on everyone.

Without double checking, I'm pretty sure women in Norway have higher education on average than men. My gf has a masters and works on her field, just like I do. Her mom and sister are proffessional as well, both have 3 kids.

I, as everyone else in latin america, carry both last names and we ALL now our grandmother's name. Its in my ID, my license, etc. My passport (Italy) has both parents last names too. In brazil and portugal, like in Norway too, the mother's last name comes first.

All of the women in my generation in my extended family work and have college, some advanced too, degrees.

Don't push your own bias on people.

I called my grandma. Her last name was Kudo(工藤) I figured after thinking about it, but had to make sure. I'm gonna maintain with english standards though that not many would know off the top of their head. Of course if its built into the system like in Latin America/portuguese type names then it is more common knowledge.

Women in norway are also hip to the game, and aren't as readily available to be baby-factories for men too:
Norwegian fertility rate at historic low.

This kind of proves my point to Unique at the beginning about how if given a choice, a woman will chase their dreams rather than stay at home barefoot in the kitchen making babies who won't even have their(pre-marriage) names. Its a bum deal. Especially in terms of career when a hiring manager can look at two candidates, a male and female, and make a decision for whats best for his company.

Say you are running a business and have to make a choice. You have a young woman and a young man for an important part of your company who are you going to pick? Even more so when you realize that this young girl has a man who will prodding her almost immediately to give birth to his child. She is gone for months at a time, and when she comes back the threat is always there again. This is the reality that women face in the job market when such expectations on them. The expectation just isnt there, and if it was the birth rate wouldnt be lowering in Norway too.

How many of the women in your family that are in your generation gave up a year to give birth to a kid?

The low birth rates have other reasons, too, though. With rising education levels people wait longer, many miss the window for kids. Also, birth rates also have a bit to do with the fact that women's rights still aren't at a point where a woman can easily combine a career and kids, it seems weird that this somehow has to be a choice, coming from a family where all the women always worked.

I think the only woman in my family that was a stay at home mom was my mother's mom, but grandma was a bit on the insane side anyway...

Still disagree. I lived in the US for years and everyone knew their mom's last name. Everyone. No questions asked. These are your experiences, nothing more. Ask @CBarca if he and his friends know their moms' last names.

And why is the low birthrate a fault of the women? its a decision to be made by both genders to have a kid. Also, baby-factories? for someone claiming to speak for women this whole thing is terrible.

Let people do what they want to do. Simple as that. More, less or no kids, its not worse or better, its a preference.