Anonther Moscow Approval

[shikarnov 7]

When I was in preschool they asked us what we wanted to be when we grew up. All of the girls said they wanted to be the first women president.

The women bears the brunt of the family. i think that's the main answer.

I might have missed something here?

Is this the real question: Why aren't women trying to become US Senators in greater numbers? I would suggest looking inward for that answer. Ask your friends. Your neighbors. Why don't they get involved in politics? Why should they? And if they're genuinely not interested, what difference does it make?

Z

So what? When I was in pre-school, I wanted to be a fireman. And then a doctor. And POTUS. And a teacher. And a mathematician (ok, this particular desire came later). In real life, I never did any of those jobs. I mean, this pre-school analogy is really a stretch.

Z

Edited April 4, 2008 by shikarnov

[eekee 182]

and my brother wanted to marry chocolate milk. but the point is i don't think females come out of the womb not wanting to go into the politics. there are societal things which come into play.

When I was in preschool they asked us what we wanted to be when we grew up. All of the girls said they wanted to be the first women president.

The women bears the brunt of the family. i think that's the main answer.

I might have missed something here?

Is this the real question: Why aren't women trying to become US Senators in greater numbers? I would suggest looking inward for that answer. Ask your friends. Your neighbors. Why don't they get involved in politics? Why should they? And if they're genuinely not interested, what difference does it make?

Z

So what? When I was in pre-school, I wanted to be a fireman. And then a doctor. And POTUS. And a teacher. And a mathematician. In real life, I never did any of those jobs. I mean, this pre-school analogy is really a stretch.

Z

[shikarnov 7]

BTW: eekee, I'd like to take a moment to say "Thanks." It's nice to have a conversation with somebody offering a differing perspective. And even though we seem to oppose one another, I'm confident that we all believe strongly in equal rights for all people even if we get hung up on some of the details of how best to make that happen.

Z

[eekee 182]

Much better than the fight on got into on a russian website where all of these Russian girls were saying that since I felt that women and men can be genuine friends without anything sexual, i must be very narrow-minded and have low self-esteem and hail from a small village in Russia.

BTW: eekee, I'd like to take a moment to say "Thanks." It's nice to have a conversation with somebody offering a differing perspective. And even though we seem to oppose one another, I'm confident that we all believe strongly in equal rights for all people even if we get hung up on some of the details of how best to make that happen.

Z

[shikarnov 7]

Much better than the fight on got into on a russian website where all of these Russian girls were saying that since I felt that women and men can be genuine friends without anything sexual, i must be very narrow-minded and have low self-esteem and hail from a small village in Russia.

Did you ever see When Harry Met Sally? If not, you have to. It deals with this exact theme, and it's hilarious.

Z

[shikarnov 7]

and my brother wanted to marry chocolate milk. but the point is i don't think females come out of the womb not wanting to go into the politics. there are societal things which come into play.

This is starting to leave the broader topic of treating people equally under the law. If women don't want to be involved in politics (or any other profession for that matter), does it really matter if that's a result of nature or nurture? Is it really so hard to believe that men and women might naturally think differently?

And even if we don't think differently, and all this turns out to be the result of nurture, so what do we do then? Engage in cultural engineering with the hopes of manipulating females from birth so that they'll be more interested in holding political office?

Z

[eekee 182]

I think that laws which make it more favorable to have both a family and a career would help.

This is starting to leave the broader topic of treating people equally under the law. If women don't want to be involved in politics (or any other profession for that matter), does it really matter if that's a result of nature or nurture? Is it really so hard to believe that men and women might naturally think differently?

And even if we don't think differently, and all this turns out to be the result of nurture, so what do we do then? Engage in cultural engineering with the hopes of manipulating females from birth so that they'll be more interested in holding political office?

Z

Nope... don't really like meg ryan. But actually it's not a theme that interests me so much, because for me the proof is in the pudding, so to speak. I have too many good male friends to make it a subject of debate for me personally.

Did you ever see When Harry Met Sally? If not, you have to. It deals with this exact theme, and it's hilarious.

Z

Edited April 5, 2008 by eekee

[shikarnov 7]

I think that laws which make it more favorable to have both a family and a career would help.

This is starting to leave the broader topic of treating people equally under the law. If women don't want to be involved in politics (or any other profession for that matter), does it really matter if that's a result of nature or nurture? Is it really so hard to believe that men and women might naturally think differently?

And even if we don't think differently, and all this turns out to be the result of nurture, so what do we do then? Engage in cultural engineering with the hopes of manipulating females from birth so that they'll be more interested in holding political office?

Z

Ok... You've piqued my curiosity... How would laws making it favorable to have both a family and a career help get more women involved in running for office? And what kinds of laws do you envision the country needs that aren't already in place?

[Bobalouie 0]

OK... looking more into it, it should have been the violence against PEOPLE act.

But doesn't IMBRA apply to both men AND women who used a dating serviceFor instance, if I had used russianhusbands.com wouldn't I also be subject to IMBRA law??

But there is no way that the law (in the instance of domestic violence) can help women to 'become equal'. Lets take this to the extreme. Lets say that a new law was passed that said that if a man hits his wife, it is an automatic 25 year sentence with no chance for parole in the federal hoosgow. That law (and all laws) can only give someone pause because laws dont prevent crime. They tell you what will happen if you do something. Since most domestic violence is not caluclated beforehand, the fact that the punishment the law provides (pause is nonexistant due to heat of the moment/crime of passion) will not be a factor and the woman will still get hit. It is already illegal to beat up people, woman or man. I dont see how a law with stricter punishment (which is really what 'special protections') are can help anyone become more equal.

The law doesnt stop me from running idiot drivers off of the road. It doesnt protect those people or prevent me from doing it. It only provides a structured outcome for if I do it and get caught. My self control and sense of right vs. wrong is what keeps me from mowing them down with my '48 Buick.

I dont know the answer to that question due to the vageries of the way the law is written. Check out this website which has a PDF of the IMBRA Law. Check out Part 2 sections 2-5. It is all about American men and foreign women. Then the rest of the document is vague about the sex of the person seeking a foriegn spouse. But, it seems pretty man-centric to me. Plus, it IS part of the Violence against WOMEN act, and of course there is no Violence against MEN act.

Edited April 5, 2008 by Bobalouie

[shikarnov 7]

I dont know the answer to that question due to the vageries of the way the law is written. Check out this website which has a PDF of the IMBRA Law. Check out Part 2 sections 2-5. It is all about American men and foreign women. Then the rest of the document is vague about the sex of the person seeking a foriegn spouse. But, it seems pretty man-centric to me. Plus, it IS part of the Violence against WOMEN act, and of course there is no Violence against MEN act.

For what its worth, here's the act in HTML format from the Library of Congress: http://thomas.loc.gov/home/gpoxmlc109/h3657_ih.xml

Z

[slim 1,525]

Miss a day, miss a lot....

OK, so if there's not enough women in Congress and only 16/100 Senators.... then who voted for so few of them? Are we to believe that only men vote? Last I checked, women have had suffrage for a long time. (That was probably even the first "feminist" issue.) If there are too few women in office, shouldn't we blame the people voting, or more appropriately, not voting for them?

This was a similar issue when black men were trying to get into politics. Even when they first ran they weren't getting elected. Why? Not enough voters were voting for them. (Not getting into the race issue, simply illustrating one side of voting/representation.) Once people started voting for them, they got elected. The same will eventually happen with women. I really don't see women's votes getting disqualified simply because they're women though.

And as far as women only getting 75% of what men get and having to put up with all the comments and this and that.... business is business. If you're not getting paid what you're worth, that's your problem. Do what you have to do to get the job you want and keep it, even excel at it. As for women having to worry about how they look.... nobody did that to women except other women. The only requirements men have ever had about your looks is that you look like you don't have a #######. (No mustache is also nice, but often not even required.)

[native 0]

"Too much documents Keerk!! Too much!!" LOL

Knock on wood, Ira was a trooper with the documents. Of course, I was the one freaking out due to philosophical objections to having our privacy invaded. Once Ira is here, safely, and her status is legally sound, I plan to found an organization geared toward doing everything possible to raise hell for the USCIS and DOS. Somebody's got to jar these agencies out of their complacency.

Z

let me know when you do that,ill be a very loud protester.

[shikarnov 7]

Knock on wood, Ira was a trooper with the documents. Of course, I was the one freaking out due to philosophical objections to having our privacy invaded. Once Ira is here, safely, and her status is legally sound, I plan to found an organization geared toward doing everything possible to raise hell for the USCIS and DOS. Somebody's got to jar these agencies out of their complacency.

Z

let me know when you do that,ill be a very loud protester.

Rest assured, I'll be certain to let you know.

Z

[Kotenochek 0]

OMG... our turn tomorrow

I hope it goes as smoothly.

It will. It will. I'd wish you luck but you don't need it. Let us know when she's approved!

Congratulations!!!! I love good news.

As an aside, it seems like we'll be crossing paths in the air. I fly to Russia on the 29th to get Ira, and we'll be returning on May 5.

Wow I can't believe how much activity we've seen here lately. So many USCIS approvals, interviews, visas, and homecomings!

I just sent all the paperwork I put together to Nadya over lunch. $163.00 via DHL, but at least I know it'll get to her. She got her packet from the embassy yesterday, so when I called today she was frantic. "Too much documents Keerk!! Too much!!" LOL Damn me and my procrastination, if I'd gotten these documents to her earlier she'd have seen that I've filled out everything her packet is telling her to fill out, including the supplemental DS-156K. I couldn't get a word in edge-wise for about 2 minutes as she rattled off all this stuff in her packet. I had to put the phone on mute for a bit because I was laughing so hard. She was genuinely freaked out.

Then she said that she has her immunizations, but not the documents to show the immunizations. I told her not to worry, that she could just get her immunizations again and get it documented this time. This did not sit well at all. "Not Keerk! Not! Too much immuneezatsia BAD!" Then she said she'd go get some documentation. LOL. I don't think I'll ask how she's going to get that document.

Haha funny the way you tell us about it:)

I had to re-do my immunisations too,since i did not have a record and i am still alive:))also they did not do all in moscow for interview,so when i came here for filing AOS i had to do more..:)Tell her not to worry:)

[Ilya R. 0]

Quesiton for someone from St. Petersburg.

When my I130 gets aproved and we move to the next step, do they setup interviews, medicals in St. Petes or Moscow? Thanks in advance!