Call Me a Skeptic

So where is the sex discrimination lawsuit?  If the tale is true, the restaurant would be opening itself up to lawsuits.

The article reeks of bullshit.  Nowhere is there any evidence the owner of the restaurant--never named in this piece--said her eating alone made it look like she was picking up men like a hooker or escort.  It is pure conjecture on the part of the author.

The BBC article about the same thing also reeks of a bullshit agenda.  Women shouldn't do one thing alone.

Sure it is "daunting" for women to eat out alone.  Sure it is.  I have been doing it for decades without incident, long before I "hit the wall," to use an MRA/MGTOW/PUA bullshit phrase.

Not This Again

I noticed the New York Times has a newsletter or whatever that pertains to women's issues, which I am sure includes trans as well, but whatever.  In this one from a couple of weeks ago, we once again get treated to a woman who thinks she has to explain why she has remained single and without kids.  This brief piece also mentions of the possibility of having "rituals" to celebrate it akin I guess to wedding showers and baby showers or whatever.

Why would anybody in 2018 even give a shit what your marital status is?

Sometimes I feel like I am in a goddamned time warp of the 1950s through the late 1960s, when the idiotic sex roles were at their peak.  This woman whines about her status now?  How does she think what it was like when women came of age during that era?  THAT was "stigma."  Try rejecting the mommy/wifey/housewife shit back then.  Believe me, I got it from all angles, and I was a young girl then.  I learned as I went through life not to care what others thought. I charted my own path, and it wasn't a "glamorous" career but a field that I enjoyed doing.   Granted, it was easier after I moved away from the family in 1984 (I returned in 2010,  long after the parents died, because of financial reasons).  But of course women like her don't know what it was like because they weren't alive then.

And why do women at all need to even explain their marital status to others?  What is wrong with telling people it is none of their fucking business?  Why even write an article about it?  It is like the author wants permission from everybody else that it's okay for her to live as she sees fit.

The bottom line is this:  Women don't need relationships to feel "whole."  They don't need men, and they don't need babies in order to be "fulfilled."  Only a society that sees women as subhuman would regard women as merely objects existing through relationships to others.

This is Hardly a "Trend"

I don't care for articles like this one.

Realistically, few single women can ever afford a house, meaning a stick house on a lot, practically everywhere in the United States. That is because of sexism in the workplace and the outrageously inflated home prices in areas of the country where realtors, beginning in the mid-1970s, started jacking up the prices figuring all homeowners had two-incomes. That is why home prices are so totally out of whack. These "single" women typically had assets from a marriage and are either widowed or divorced, or else they are women who were born into privilege or were lucky enough to take jobs in the public sector and have careers of 20, 25, 30 years or more. Few women have "glamorous" careers where they can live a two-income lifestyle on one income. Most who do are married. Many single women have to shack up with men or take on roommates. They may have inherited a home from their parents. It is hardly satisfactory.

It's like the author doesn't truly understand that just because a handful of women are "becoming first-time home buyers" that there is any kind of trend at all. Virtually no woman alone can break into owning real estate. A man's income is essential for the vast majority of women to "own" a home. Period.
The women depicted are not typical of single women as a whole.

What homes single women can buy are either condos or manufactured housing (the latter I intend to do eventually, and I am in my sixties and never owned any real estate in my life), which are better than renting a place, but they aren't stick houses on a lot and don't hold their value as well. The article says as much about women "preferring" condos. That doesn't impress me in the least. The few who can afford a stick house on a lot are living in parts of the country where nobody wants to live. There is a reason homes in the midwest and deep South tend to be less expensive.

This Is My Situation Exactly

It doesn't take much, folks, to wind up like this woman, working until she is close to 80 years old.

A lot of people in this world have no clue what it is like to be a single woman over 60. It is basically a ticket to poverty to not have that working spouse.

She has more than I am going to get, since I am being fucked over because I have a tiny pension of $312 a month. See, I am subject to the terrible WEP because I worked in Nevada public employment.

My Social Security, while I will be forced to take next year, will be only about $725 a month. I will have to continue to work until I can't do it anymore.

The only way I won't collect SS at 62 is if I work full time, but that is a pipe dream at my age.

It took me FOUR goddamned years to get the classified, no benefits except PERS, school district job.

Nearing 80, she suffers daily aches and pains — leg cramps and arthritis and weakness from low blood sugar. Big Foot has its own problems: The roof leaks, so do the pipes beneath the sink. The water pump feeding the shower and sink is failing. “One of us is going to give out first,” Westfall said with a laugh. “It’s either me or Big Foot.”

She avoided disaster after the prime rib dinner by persuading the insurance company to space out her payment in installments. But then that same month, she was caught driving 43 mph in a 35-mph zone. The ticket: $300.

“I could just cry,” she wrote in her journal. “I won’t have earned $300 in all of May. If I can get it lowered to $150, it will still be more than my entire grocery budget. Don’t know how I’m going to manage it.”

But see, it's her own goddamned fault, not the system that is rigged largely against single women and of people who have the unmitigated nerve to be over 55. She should have stayed married and would have had a secure future instead of wanting to be independent.

At least at one time she owned her own place. I doubt that is going to happen to me.

Going Solo

Of course I agree with the author of this piece that women should go out and travel alone. I have taken two major trips by myself in my lifetime, and that was to Kentucky in 1989 and to Las Vegas in 2006. I regularly drove my car from Reno to southern Oregon and back by myself. I also took a couple of trips to Portland and back alone. So far I haven't traveled overseas alone, but that isn't out of the question although if and when I do it, I will likely join a touring group rather than just plan out an itinerary.

I have always done things by myself. I never felt I had to have a man to go out and do things. I work out alone, most of the time I eat out alone and go to the movies alone. It doesn't bother me, and it never has, and it never will. I never felt unsafe doing it any more than living by myself.

A woman-hating society sends all kinds of messages about women being by themselves, like they have to live their lives in fear.

It always pisses me off.

Money, or the lack of it, is the big obstacle now, but I plan to take a WomanTours vacation next year to Niagara Falls, provided I can swing it financially. I will rent a bike for the tour and get single occupancy if I can do it.

If Women

don't want to be losers in life, i.e., not marrying, then they should take any piece of shit who comes down the pike.

This desperation bullshit gets circulated every five or ten years.

Any man is better than none, according to this blathering moron.