Thank you! It helps that this was posted by my sister, who is ever-capable of civilized discourse so I knew she wasn't going to dig her heels in as a knee-jerk reaction. It's easier in those cases to approach as though the question is still open.
And yes, what bothers me so much about the whole original idea is although it sounds like it genuinely values women, it gives them no voice. Why do I need to wait for someone to come along and 'discover' what a valuable gem I am? The more I think about it, the more irritated I get. And the more I think about it, the more I see things that assume this. "You should be with a guy who messes up your lipstick, not your mascara" was the most recent post I saw. Yeah, sure, affection/passion is better than misery. DUH. It still assumes the woman is the object to be acted upon. BAH. *punches things*
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2013-01-11 05:33 pm (UTC)And yes, what bothers me so much about the whole original idea is although it sounds like it genuinely values women, it gives them no voice. Why do I need to wait for someone to come along and 'discover' what a valuable gem I am? The more I think about it, the more irritated I get. And the more I think about it, the more I see things that assume this. "You should be with a guy who messes up your lipstick, not your mascara" was the most recent post I saw. Yeah, sure, affection/passion is better than misery. DUH. It still assumes the woman is the object to be acted upon. BAH. *punches things*