Today's GOP

nakedfrog

No Lifer
Apr 3, 2001
53,765
6,259
126
It's weird, AFAIK feminism still allows for women who want to be fully subjugated by men to do so.
"Here's the deal with arranged marriages is that your parents want what's best for you. So if you let your parents choose for you, they're absolutely going to choose the best,"
Fucking LOL. I'm pretty sure that's not fully reflective of the history of arranged marriage.
"My real position is that women are our currency to be bartered and traded," he added.
There's already a country that's great for people like that, I wonder why he doesn't just move to his utopia.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: dank69

pmv

Lifer
May 30, 2008
10,174
4,913
136
There are different forms of arranged-marriage, though. I've known quite a few people (of South Asian origin) who have at least started with that process, or considered it, though not sure if all of them went through with it in the end (lost contact with some of them before it got to that point). There's a difference between 'arranged marriage' and 'forced marriage' (the latter also happens and is a nasty phenomenon, but arranged marriages can happen with the full consent of those involved). Some would argue that it's merely making the transactional nature of marriage, that is always present, a bit more explicit.

Of course the most obvious practioners of arranged marriage would be the various European Royal Families. Most of those didn't seem to work out terribly successfully.
 

nakedfrog

No Lifer
Apr 3, 2001
53,765
6,259
126
There are different forms of arranged-marriage, though. I've known quite a few people (of South Asian origin) who have at least started with that process, or considered it, though not sure if all of them went through with it in the end (lost contact with some of them before it got to that point). There's a difference between 'arranged marriage' and 'forced marriage' (the latter also happens and is a nasty phenomenon, but arranged marriages can happen with the full consent of those involved). Some would argue that it's merely making the transactional nature of marriage, that is always present, a bit more explicit.

Of course the most obvious practioners of arranged marriage would be the various European Royal Families. Most of those didn't seem to work out terribly successfully.
A guy I worked with had an arranged marriage back in 2004, I think it was. No idea how happy his wife was with the setup though.
 

fleshconsumed

Diamond Member
Feb 21, 2002
6,253
1,727
136
There are different forms of arranged-marriage, though. I've known quite a few people (of South Asian origin) who have at least started with that process, or considered it, though not sure if all of them went through with it in the end (lost contact with some of them before it got to that point). There's a difference between 'arranged marriage' and 'forced marriage' (the latter also happens and is a nasty phenomenon, but arranged marriages can happen with the full consent of those involved). Some would argue that it's merely making the transactional nature of marriage, that is always present, a bit more explicit.

Of course the most obvious practioners of arranged marriage would be the various European Royal Families. Most of those didn't seem to work out terribly successfully.
True. I've known two couples, both of Indian descent, who had arranged marriage. As far as I know both were happy. Neither one was what you would call a forced marriage, instead families played more of a matchmaker role. Parents would find a match, kids would meet them, get to know each other, go out on a few dates, and were completely free to reject the match if they didn't like him/her. This may seem odd to western culture, but in the end, so long as there is consent from everybody involved I don't see anything wrong with it.

What current right wing extremists in GOP propose is return to woman being property, and that in my opinion is not OK.
 

tweaker2

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
12,989
4,631
136
There are different forms of arranged-marriage, though. I've known quite a few people (of South Asian origin) who have at least started with that process, or considered it, though not sure if all of them went through with it in the end (lost contact with some of them before it got to that point). There's a difference between 'arranged marriage' and 'forced marriage' (the latter also happens and is a nasty phenomenon, but arranged marriages can happen with the full consent of those involved). Some would argue that it's merely making the transactional nature of marriage, that is always present, a bit more explicit.

Of course the most obvious practioners of arranged marriage would be the various European Royal Families. Most of those didn't seem to work out terribly successfully.
Agreed. A lot of those were of the incestuous nature to keep their bloodlines pure. I guess they never knew what happens when inbreeding occurs for one and worse still a few generations down the line.
 

Lost_in_the_HTTP

Diamond Member
Nov 17, 2019
6,224
3,651
106
True. I've known two couples, both of Indian descent, who had arranged marriage. As far as I know both were happy.

... instead families played more of a matchmaker role. Parents would find a match, kids would meet them, get to know each other, go out on a few dates, and were completely free to reject the match if they didn't like him/her.
I have a feeling there is a LOT of that in American Blue Blood families today.
 

hal2kilo

Lifer
Feb 24, 2009
19,775
6,495
136
Speaking of lying traitors...

While I agree the majority of Republicans are lying traitors, I doubt many support this quackery
Don’t be fooled: The GOP love affair with Putin is worse than it looks | Salon.com

Public opinion polls taken before the invasion of Ukraine show that Republicans view Vladimir Putin as a better leader than Joe Biden. That is no coincidence. It is publicly known that Putin and Russia's intelligence agencies have been engaged in a long-term influence campaign designed to manipulate (and manage) the Republican Party, its leaders, the right-wing news media and their public.

Putin is an authoritarian and a demagogue. He is anti-human, anti-freedom and anti-democracy. He stands against the future and human progress and pluralism. To many of his admirers in America and the West, he is a leader of "White Christianity." Putin has persecuted and imperiled the LGBTQ community, and is hostile to women's rights and women's equality. He kills and imprisons journalists, and is doing his best to silence free speech.
 

nakedfrog

No Lifer
Apr 3, 2001
53,765
6,259
126
Speaking of lying traitors...


Don’t be fooled: The GOP love affair with Putin is worse than it looks | Salon.com

Public opinion polls taken before the invasion of Ukraine show that Republicans view Vladimir Putin as a better leader than Joe Biden. That is no coincidence. It is publicly known that Putin and Russia's intelligence agencies have been engaged in a long-term influence campaign designed to manipulate (and manage) the Republican Party, its leaders, the right-wing news media and their public.

Putin is an authoritarian and a demagogue. He is anti-human, anti-freedom and anti-democracy. He stands against the future and human progress and pluralism. To many of his admirers in America and the West, he is a leader of "White Christianity." Putin has persecuted and imperiled the LGBTQ community, and is hostile to women's rights and women's equality. He kills and imprisons journalists, and is doing his best to silence free speech.
Yes, that is exactly what the GOP seems to be running headlong towards, and somehow don't seem to experience any cognitive dissonance when squaring it with the notions of freedom and justice.
 

Grey_Beard

Golden Member
Sep 23, 2014
1,825
2,006
136
Today's GOP wants a theocratic country that is straight and white.
Yes, freedom of religion meaning you're free to be a baptist, or a southern baptist, or an episcopalian, or a methodist, or a lutheran...
I have said this before, the GQP desires a Christian fundamentalist nation. They see Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan and they see an enemy, but they also see what they desire. They want a society, not based on equality and freedom, that is about religious fundamentalism. I feel this is exactly what our founders did not want, therefore the separation of church and state. Freedom to them is a means to manipulate to then establish, not a free, society that is extremely religious and is based on biblical doctrines. They can see no other way, because it has worked for them personally, therefore, it is clearly the best choice for everyone no matter if they “want or desire” it. They know what is best for everyone. This has always been a feature of the Republicon party, this part is much more transparent than it ever was before.
 

pmv

Lifer
May 30, 2008
10,174
4,913
136
I have said this before, the GQP desires a Christian fundamentalist nation. They see Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan and they see an enemy, but they also see what they desire. They want a society, not based on equality and freedom, that is about religious fundamentalism. I feel this is exactly what our founders did not want, therefore the separation of church and state. Freedom to them is a means to manipulate to then establish, not a free, society that is extremely religious and is based on biblical doctrines. They can see no other way, because it has worked for them personally, therefore, it is clearly the best choice for everyone no matter if they “want or desire” it. They know what is best for everyone. This has always been a feature of the Republicon party, this part is much more transparent than it ever was before.
Seems to me hat the commitment to plutocracy is primary. Christianity in the US changed nature, in order to meet the needs of property-owning white people and support a race-and-class-based oligarchy. It's less that Christians took over the Republican Party and more that Republicans took over Christianity.
 

nakedfrog

No Lifer
Apr 3, 2001
53,765
6,259
126
Seems to me hat the commitment to plutocracy is primary. Christianity in the US changed nature, in order to meet the needs of property-owning white people and support a race-and-class-based oligarchy. It's less that Christians took over the Republican Party and more that Republicans took over Christianity.
Eh, mostly Evangelical Christianity.
 

Lost_in_the_HTTP

Diamond Member
Nov 17, 2019
6,224
3,651
106
Normal practice for them.

Nebraska congressman Jeff Fortenberry found guilty in campaign probe

CBS News|7 hours ago
Jeff Fortenberry of Nebraska was convicted Thursday of charges that he lied to federal authorities about an illegal $30,000 contribution to his campaign from a foreign billionaire at a 2016 Los Angeles fundraiser.
U.S. congressman convicted of lying to FBI about campaign contribution

Reuters|7 hours ago
A federal jury in Los Angeles on Thursday convicted U.S. Representative Jeff Fortenberry, a Republican from Nebraska, of three felony counts for lying to the FBI about a foreign campaign contribution from a Nigerian billionaire in 2016.
 

hal2kilo

Lifer
Feb 24, 2009
19,775
6,495
136
Normal practice for them.

Nebraska congressman Jeff Fortenberry found guilty in campaign probe

CBS News|7 hours ago
Jeff Fortenberry of Nebraska was convicted Thursday of charges that he lied to federal authorities about an illegal $30,000 contribution to his campaign from a foreign billionaire at a 2016 Los Angeles fundraiser.
U.S. congressman convicted of lying to FBI about campaign contribution

Reuters|7 hours ago
A federal jury in Los Angeles on Thursday convicted U.S. Representative Jeff Fortenberry, a Republican from Nebraska, of three felony counts for lying to the FBI about a foreign campaign contribution from a Nigerian billionaire in 2016.
Yea, but the Nigerian was probably very anti-homosexual, so it was all good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

ASK THE COMMUNITY