It seems that despite the widespread availability of education, there are still a number of folks in Malaysia who believe in some caveman postulation that only the man provides and the woman is the receiver.

What does gathering fruits in prehistoric times have anything to do with education and empowerment of women in today's world?  DUH!

Spare me the false rhetorics about genes and whatnot - it's obvious your reading material is probably limited to CLEO magazines.

And now you are using a strawman poll done in a social internet forum as an argument point?  DUH again!

I can be bottom of anyone's list for all that matter as I am a happily married man and do not need some snotty gold-digging woman's opinion to feel good about myself.

In prehistoric times, men did the bulk of the hunter-gatherer role CONTRARY to your statement.  The women tended the home and looked after the children.  Read social history if you even know what that is.

So why regress to the notion that women nowadays can sponge off men?

Good thing is my daughters are well-educated people and need not rely on anyone but believe in sharing 

Show a quote or link then.

Again, give me a good reason why women should sponge of men when they can rely on themselves and earn their own living.

The books states that men were the main providers for their families and groups/ clans in prehistoric times (albeit a lightly touched matter) so spare us your crap about mistakes.

Provide an answer as to why women should sponge off men.

moorish , simple question .

do you live off ur husband completely 100 % ? or do you pay for ur own stuff like : cloths , makeup , woman stuff etc etc .

just wana know what type of woman you are before debating on this issue , as i believe different people with different living style have different opinion .

nobody opinion is wrong . just different .

a person who is born in a place where ppl are killing each other everyday may think killing is ok . while someone who is born in a place where prostitution is everywhere might actually consider it as a decent respectable job . Eg : Thailand

why SPS and other people may have conflict of thoughts with you maybe because of this .

so i wanna know , what type of woman are you ?

i am trying to point out a point which is .

in this modern time ,
Dad job is not only putting food on the table , but also to help out on the house duties .
Mom job is not only in the house , but also if possible , help out on financial .

Why are there still ppl clingy on the concept man MUST 100% provide , woman must DO HOUSE CHORE amaze me .

i am not saying its wrong for a woman be a housewife if both party are happy with it .

Previous post you said ur dad came home and waited for dinner , wouldnt it be better if smtimes he take time off helping ur mom ?

i dono bout all ur family here , but this is how my family works . and i think its very strong as a family .

tryin to make a point that
A father duty is not merely just food on table , and a mother duty is not merely house chore .
times changes ady .

Shailaja Fennell and Madeleine Arnot are female authors.

Looks like you are talking through your rear end again.

---

Added on May 12, 2009, 9:16 pm
dont' forget the men's emotional needs as well.  It's not one sided.

---

Added on May 12, 2009, 9:18 pm
That's the way I brought up my daughters and my missus and I would have it no other way.

Seeing my daughter in a happy and fulfilling marriage has been a joy in our lives.

It seems that despite the widespread availability of education, there are still a number of folks in Malaysia who believe in some caveman postulation that only the man provides and the woman is the receiver.

Spare us your cheap and inaccurate history lessons about gender conditions.

For quality information regarding gender roles and how education has empowered BOTH men and women, I recommend the following book:

Gender Education & Equality in a Global Context
Conceptual Frameworks and Policy Perspectives
By Shailaja Fennell, Madeleine Arnot
In the 21st century, MORE women are working productively than ever before at any point in history.  BOTH parents take care of their children.
Due primarily to education and a more effective dissemination of quality information.

Read about real social conditions before you debate with me about this subject.

In prehistoric times, men did the bulk of the hunter-gatherer role CONTRARY to your statement.  The women tended the home and looked after the children.  Read social history if you even know what that is.

So why regress to the notion that women nowadays can sponge off men?

Good thing is my daughters are well-educated people and need not rely on anyone but believe in sharing 

How many books on gender and society have YOU read?  I stated men was by far the dominant gender during prehistoric times and were even willing to kill to obtain women.  In current times, that power gap has been greatly narrowed as education has empowered many women and rightly so.  http://www.dur.ac.uk/news/newsitem/?itemno=6585

Read some of these and know about the challenges women have faced throughout history and how many of the them were overcome:

1) Sex differences in social behavior: A social-role interpretation by by Alice H. Eagly

2) Women and Men in Organizations: Sex and Gender Issues at Work by Jeanette N. Cleveland, Margaret Stockdale, Kevin R. Murphy

The point of contention here is not about your fascination with pink colors, it is about WHY do you believe women should leech off men?

Answer the question unless you are too pipsqueak to avoid replying.

A vast amount of ethnographic and archaeological evidence demonstrates that the sexual division of labor in which men hunt and women gather wild fruits and vegetables is an extremely common phenomenon among hunter-gatherers worldwide, but there are a number of documented exceptions to this general pattern. A study done on the Aeta people of the Philippines states: "About 85% of Philippine Aeta women hunt, and they hunt the same quarry as men. Aeta women hunt in groups and with dogs, and have a 31% success rate as opposed to 17% for men. Their rates are even better when they combine forces with men: mixed hunting groups have a full 41% success rate among the Aeta."[6] It was also found among the Ju'/hoansi people of Namibia that women helped the men during hunting by helping them track down quarry.[9] Moreover, recent archaeological research done by the anthropologist and archaeologist Steven Kuhn from the University of Arizona suggests that the sexual division of labor did not exist prior to the Upper Paleolithic and developed relatively recently in human history. The sexual division of labor may have arisen to allow humans to acquire food and other resources more efficiently.[10] It would, therefore, be an over-generalization to say that men always hunt and women always gather.

Let's take a look at the postulations in greater details before you embark on false accusations, shall we?

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/20...sex-humans.html

Now according to National Geographic sources, prehistoric men (I should say Neanderthals to be more precise, hence I apologize for failing to be more specific by differentiating Neanderthal and Cro-Magnon) did not have a division of labour between the genders and preyed almost exclusively on game by largely depending on the physically more powerful male gender of this branch of homo sapiens (some might argue neanderthals were a seperate branch of humans altogether i.e. Homo neanderthalensis).  This is WHAT I pointed out in my earlier posting i.e. the male species played a more dominant role in hunting and gathering (not much gathering to be precise). 

Modern humans (i.e. Cro-Magnons) which arrived 45,000 years ago organized their lives by defining roles for men, women and children and this may have been the tipping point in which the modern homo sapiens species dominated and eventually led to the extinction of the neanderthal sub-species of humanity.

A very poignant remark by an anthropologist:

The findings, he added, should not be taken as a justification for the separation of roles for men and women in contemporary society.

"We shouldn't look to the remote past for clues about how we ought to behave today," Kuhn said.

In short, DON'T use the past to justify present day behaviours.

The scientists point out in their study that gender roles were not always the same in early-human cultures, and there's nothing that predisposes either sex toward certain kinds of work.

"That women sometimes become successful hunters and men become gatherers means that the universal tendency to divide subsistence labor be gender is not solely the result of innate physical or psychological differences between the sexes; much of it has to be learned," the authors write.

"I've always been impressed by the observation that female Neandertal hand bones indicate that their hands were just as powerful as those of male Neandertals," he said.

"This indicates to me that female Neandertals were doing things with their hands that required significant physical force."

"Whether this fact means that female Neandertals were performing the same tasks as their male counterparts, or they were simply performing different tasks that required the same amount of force, is up for debate," he said.

"Nevertheless, this line of evidence does support an interpretation that the Neandertal sexual division of labor, or lack thereof, may have been fundamentally different from the division of labor in modern-human groups."

As in hunter-gatherer societies of the recent past, men likely hunted large animals while women gathered small game and plants, enabling a more efficient use of available food sources.