Women, here it is: What's Wrong With Men

Originally posted by orangetom1999
They are convenient for many women but they wont respect them. When you lose a womans respect beyond a certain point as a man ..she is finished with you. Remember that Zed!!

If she is artificial ..and has artificial values what does this do to the bar you are expected to jump to and reach?? And if you dont reach it or balk..what does this do to the respect quotient you will recieve. Do you think the average male is even quick enough to ask if the bar is worth jumping to?????
Its about ignorance Zed...male and female..

Definately good points OrangeTom.

My wife respects me for various reasons (I have no idea why...lol) AND she is the exception to the rule. Mother's Day was the typical card and flowers. Father's Day was a big screen tv and surround-sound system.



No artificial values there!

the woman I am seeing respects me too..but doesnt like many of my beliefs. She finds them like a square peg in a round hole.

She wants me to get new truck ..not at all. I'll keep my olde one as long as I can..I'll run it into the ground. Also I told her to buy it for me...the conversation broke right down. Imagine that!!!

She respects me because I can get things done...when the going gets really rough. It makes life easier for her and her kids...grandkids too. I dont always pick up on her clues and cues..and she doesnt like it when I use that terminology to debate my points during a disagreement. Especially when I tell her not to make me disposable and expendable.

Of particular irritation to her is that I dont celebrate birthdays, christmas, easter or halloween. These are sacred icons to many women. It is a automatic default setting for a man to go along with this stuff. This is called a "given". Male disposability is often about "Givens".
Try "Givens" with many of todays "enlightened women " and see what happens. It is not a two way street....no way!!!

Gotta go Zed...work to do,
Thanks,
Orangetom

Originally posted by orangetom1999
Of particular irritation to her is that I dont celebrate birthdays, christmas, easter or halloween. These are sacred icons to many women. It is a automatic default setting for a man to go along with this stuff. This is called a "given". Male disposability is often about "Givens".
Try "Givens" with many of todays "enlightened women " and see what happens. It is not a two way street....no way!!!

Wanting to celebrate birthdays and christmas has nothing to do with them being female 'sacred icons'. They are are a 'given' to just as many men. These are cultural traditions that many people are reared with so of course when they grow up it is sentimental to them. I have never observed people celebrating them just because a woman told them they should- thats just paranoid. I personally can't stand christmas [especially christmas dinner] but it's very important to my brothers and their families so I 'go along' with it for this very reason.. is this 'unenlightened'?

[edit on 4-10-2005 by riley]

Good to see you again..its been awhile.
I did not say I objected to them celebrating these holidays or belief systems. That is thier buisness.
I dont appreciate someone trying to put the settings on thier dial onto mine against my will and over my objections then labeling and name calling when it doesnt go across as a automatic pass to play through because of social status or belief systems. This is not "enlightened conduct or behavior..it is a "given". It is not tolerant ...it is seductive.
Celebrate what you want ..Its just not for me..and dont attempt to seduce me into it by guilt or even another set of reasoning. That is what I tell my woman. Im not intrested in it. I am not someone elses "givens"
Thats all Im saying.

Thanks Riley,
Orangetom

Originally posted by orangetom1999
Good to see you again..its been awhile.

Likewise.

I did not say I objected to them celebrating these holidays or belief systems. That is thier buisness.

Though it does seem you are making a 'point' against participating because you've somehow convinced yourself that normal cultural traditions are part of some grand feminist agenda to oppress you.. otherwise you wouldn't have made generalisations about 'most' women trying to make men go along with everything they say. Now if you had've said that she's trying to force you into going to a male stip joint just so you can hold handbag I'd say you've got a point.. but refusing to go celebrate holidays and then blaming her for being a pushy woman sounds a little warped.. now if you were a Moslem not wanting to celebrate christmas it might make some sense but I don't understand how you conclude it's female dominence.

I dont appreciate someone trying to put the settings on thier dial onto mine against my will and over my objections then labeling and name calling when it doesnt go across as a automatic pass to play through because of social status or belief systems. This is not "enlightened conduct or behavior..it is a "given". It is not tolerant ...it is seductive.

Wow. You should really dump her arse if you tbelieve she is this manipulative and calculating.

Celebrate what you want ..Its just not for me

I will. It's called being 'social'.

and dont attempt to seduce me into it by guilt or even another set of reasoning.That is what I tell my woman. Im not intrested in it. I am not someone elses "givens"
Thats all Im saying.

'Seduce' you? Strange word to use. I suspect you've remembered I am female and thus it must be my 'seductive' feminine wriles taking effect through the computer via what you may consider an typical 'female' attempt to emotionally black mail you into submission. Oops a button just fell off my blouise and there was a glimpse of cleavage.. you will obey..
Don't assume I'm trying to get you to do something you don't want to do.. why would I give a? Just don't make assumptions and generalisations about women you don't know.. you make it sound like we're all manipulative bitches after mean tickets. Everyone has problems with relationships but I'm more likely to look at the individual themselves rather than whats between their legs [metephorically speaking of course.. ]

Thanks for your reply,
Actually Riley the technique usually used it to call me a stick in the mud or Scrooge for not going along. I dont go ballistic on this I just dont go along due to this kind of persuasion technique. On anything.
I can be social..Im just not social at this setting or ...I think the word you used is cultural tradition. I have no such obligation to do so. Period.
The technuque used is that within the social structure I am somehow morally obligated to change the settings on my dial and pick up on her clues and cues and perform up to expectations in the holiday , birthday or whatever arena. In otherwords give up my dial settings and take up hers.
The idea is that this is what men do..this is what they are for. A "given."
It is not just this woman ,Riley,there have been others. Same type of fingerprint. And I have gotten rid of some of them and over this very issue when they dont seem to get it and become tiring in thier attempts to change the settings on my dial. I make compromises in some arenas..others ..not intrested. I just know where it is intended to go.

One more point...Riley...in my post to Esoteric Teacher..earlier in this board. When I use the term Femminine...as stated in this post..it does not always mean female...as in sex. It refers to a spiritual nature of the soul per se. It is in fact found in men..too.
My main point Riley is that I am not disposable and expendable for the settings and consumption rates of a woman or her kids..by some subtle or not so subtle exchanging of the settings on my dial for hers through some social or cultural traditional requirement. I do not come into her home and make the statement that she needs to give it up for me or change the settings on her dial. See what I mean.??
I am not afraid of losing this woman over this issue. Ive done it before. I dont come to a any woman just for her holiday,birthday beliefs as a standard by which to judge her worth. I have however had women tell me .."dont be surprised if she dumps you over this." It becomes obvious how shallow some of them are ..not all but some. A woman who dumps a man because he doesnt take up her holiday/birthday settings is in fact a very shallow person. REmember that word Riley...tolerance. The femminine ..like this word alot ..especially when it means playing through while others stand pat.
What I am not intrested in is male disposability/expendability in a multitasking world on this topic of holidays/birthdays..or any other.

Thanks,
Orangetom






quote: Originally posted by orangetom1999
Good to see you again..its been awhile.

Likewise.
quote: I did not say I objected to them celebrating these holidays or belief systems. That is thier buisness.
Though it does seem you are making a 'point' against participating because you've somehow convinced yourself that normal cultural traditions are part of some grand feminist agenda to oppress you.. otherwise you wouldn't have made generalisations about 'most' women trying to make men go along with everything they say. Now if you had've said that she's trying to force you into going to a male stip joint just so you can hold handbag I'd say you've got a point.. but refusing to go celebrate holidays and then blaming her for being a pushy woman sounds a little warped.. now if you were a Moslem not wanting to celebrate christmas it might make some sense but I don't understand how you conclude it's female dominence.
quote: I dont appreciate someone trying to put the settings on thier dial onto mine against my will and over my objections then labeling and name calling when it doesnt go across as a automatic pass to play through because of social status or belief systems. This is not "enlightened conduct or behavior..it is a "given". It is not tolerant ...it is seductive.
Wow. You should really dump her arse if you tbelieve she is this manipulative and calculating.
quote: Celebrate what you want ..Its just not for me
I will. It's called being 'social'.
quote: and dont attempt to seduce me into it by guilt or even another set of reasoning.That is what I tell my woman. Im not intrested in it. I am not someone elses "givens"
Thats all Im saying.

'Seduce' you? Strange word to use. I suspect you've remembered I am female and thus it must be my 'seductive' feminine wriles taking effect through the computer via what you may consider an typical 'female' attempt to emotionally black mail you into submission. Oops a button just fell off my blouise and there was a glimpse of cleavage.. you will obey..
Don't assume I'm trying to get you to do something you don't want to do.. why would I give a? Just don't make assumptions and generalisations about women you don't know.. you make it sound like we're all manipulative bitches after mean tickets. Everyone has problems with relationships but I'm more likely to look at the individual themselves rather than whats between their legs [metephorically speaking of course.. ]





>

No I did not remember that you are female..not that it is important to this debate. I thought you were male. No problem however.

Thanks,
Orangetom

I would like to offer this premise if I may:

There is nothing wrong with men. There is nothing wrong with women.

We, as individuals, usually attract to ourselves lessons (the people, places,
things, and events) that are most needed for our growth on this planet:
Some to correct ineffective patterns in our lives, which result from the
inappropriate choices we've made, and others - seemingly horrible in the
beginning - that eventually enhance our lives in wonderful ways.
Sometimes we get a combination of both, which can lend itself to utter
confusion and anger, if one doesn't know how to or is not willing to see.

Just remember: The more you clean out your old emotiional "baggage"
through forgiveness, letting go of the past, etc..., the more you attract the
people, places, things, and events that will be more of what you seek: You
become a magnet for those things.

If you (not you personally) are still thinking the same old thoughts, carrying
around the same old hurts, blaming the same old things, and coming up
with the same old excuses, then you will continue to get the same old
people, things, and events happening in your life.


Or... you could just say *phffft!*, and eat several pints of Ben & Jerry's Ice Cream!



[edit on 10/17/2005 by WalksThroughTime]

[edit on 21-10-2005 by sanctum]

Originally posted by WalksThroughTime
I would like to offer this premise if I may:

There is nothing wrong with men. There is nothing wrong with women.

I suppose observing people with standards that tell you that men and women are perfectly flawless makes for an optimistic point of view, to say the least.


It is an illusion created by our own smug perceptions that our allegience is our choice. This statement is undeniable when the individual's perception is ruled by the first implanted command of "self preservation" = "self preserve" = "self before serve" = the only true information being integrated into the conscious is that information which is most self serving.

Simply stated, if you are a self serving individual ..... you condition yourself to integrate only that which is most self serving.

To say that there is nothing wrong with people, is to say humanity is flawless.

Respectfully:

Teacher, if you will kindly re-read my post, you will not see any part where
I said or even implied that "humanity is flawless". Unfortunately, that is
your "assumption" about what I wrote, which has nothing to do with what
is actually written.

I just have one comment: It's a quote from my grandma that she uses whenever people of a different sex are arguing: "You will never understand your wife because she is a woman and you will never understand your husband because he is a man." I find that true and it makes things a lot easier. I can try to understand my husband,but instead of pushing an issue I remember that he truly is different from me. So I don't think there is anything wrong with men as a whole,they're just men,and personally I couldn't live without 'em.

i believe, teach, that walk's statement (rather than calling humanity 'flawless') illustrates the point that the issue cannot be viewed as entirely gender related- there is nothing that can release us from the responsibility of treating others respectfully. (ie. bad behavior cannot be justified or dismissed by saying 'i couldn't help it, i'm a man/woman') thus, we can't point the finger at either sex and assume that therein lies the problem.

we, as individuals, are responsible for our own choices and decisions. we are learning to enjoy the fruits of, or suffer the consequences of- our actions and our interactions with others. to grow (and grow up!) we must remove all excuses that we as men or women may try to formulate in defense of our behaviors, which can oftimes be very inappropriate- but the point is to gain the lesson and avoid repeating the mistake.

do we REALLY need to probe all the way back to the womb and debate whether a child that was held against its mother's breast ten minutes after birth will be kinder than one held ten days later? whether they learned fear, pain, security or sense of self before they learned to speak? would that experience (birth) be any more traumatic or formative depending on gender? (i don't remember my own birth, but certainly don't consider it when pondering the question of my character or why i am who i am today) culture and experience still cannot explain why we do not ALL hold similar beliefs and morals to every sibling raised in ONE household- and do we really need to supply man (that's mankind, not directed specifically to men or women) with any more excuses or reasons that they should not be held accountable for their own deeds?

in my opinion, it's easier to create an excuse FOR the behavior than to enact change IN the behavior. i couldn't begin to speculate whether that stems from control issues, fear, self-preservation, laziness or combinations of many different factors, but i'm willing to venture that both sexes are active in the struggle to preserve themselves (or serve self before others)- and that includes, sadly, at times walking all over or mistreating their fellow man (again... mankind).


something i've observed equally in men and women:

how often will they admit when they are wrong?

pay attention the next time someone apologizes to you.

how often have you heard "i'm sorry, but..." and an attempt to establish a reasonable excuse?

how often have you experienced another say "i was wrong. i did 'this this this'. i am sorry." and leave it at that?

WHY or WHY NOT?

would an example of 'WHY NOT' be considered a display of fear and self-preservation?

in your experience have people generally been indirect in their apologies, offering their remorse, but attempting to lay some of the blame on someone else, something else or the situation?

which person would you respect more? the person that admits fault and acknowledges a shortcoming, or the person that tries to make up an excuse? afterall, if you use the excuse 'i'm a man' or 'i'm a woman', you'll still be a man or woman afterwards (all surgeries excluded), and that isn't very promising where any attempt to avoid the unkind or inappropriate behavior is concerned!

i find it particularly interesting that you are a man asking for comment and opinion on this topic. i am not suggesting that your research or opinion on it would have been different, but i was intrigued to discover your gender later in the posts. can you explain more of your motivation behind the research? have any of the comments posted here confirmed what you already believed on the topic or expanded your view any?

one last remark, although i don't recall exactly whose statement it was- on people that act one way at the office, another way for their parents, another way for friends, etc. while i must agree, yes, it does take a fair amount of 'social skill'- WOW! that's an entire topic all on its own! man or woman, i would regard that behavior as dishonest, a person not being true to themselves. in the end they may discover that others cannot appreciate them for 'who they really are' because they are constantly changing to meet others' expectations... doesn't sound like a very happy or joyous way to live! we've all walked that path to some degree, i'm no exception.... some would argue that it's different aspects of the personality that come out when needed for certain social situations, or that you don't have to use the 'professional work phone voice' when chatting on the phone to friends- at momma's you might prop your feet up on the table, but wouldn't dare do that at your girlfriend or boyfriend's/spouse's mother's.... while it might be fun to explore ALL the many varied ways this takes place, that might be fuel for another thread that someone could start at some point... (if it hasn't been discussed already) i'd certainly be interested in participating...

Originally posted by amithyzt
i believe, teach, that walk's statement (rather than calling humanity 'flawless') illustrates the point that the issue cannot be viewed as entirely gender related- there is nothing that can release us from the responsibility of treating others respectfully.

The judicial system and courts of law in the land I live do not always agree with this statement. One's mental health as determined by professionals may even decide one is exempt from participating in thier own defense.

(ie. bad behavior cannot be justified or dismissed by saying 'i couldn't help it, i'm a man/woman').

And yet, I have witnessed numerous times womens' behaviors and actions being excused and justified by chemical imbalances due to menstral cycles, and the effects the imbalances have on the process of rational thought, ie. behaviors and actions that were against what is usually tolerated in the workplace.

we, as individuals, are responsible for our own choices and decisions. we are learning to enjoy the fruits of, or suffer the consequences of- our actions and our interactions with others. to grow (and grow up!) we must remove all excuses that we as men or women may try to formulate in defense of our behaviors, which can oftimes be very inappropriate- but the point is to gain the lesson and avoid repeating the mistake.

How are we learning?

Through association?

Association to what?

To remove such excuses, they must be analized.

do we REALLY need to probe all the way back to the womb and debate whether a child that was .......

The answer is a simple: NO
But, only if you do not subscribe to the medically and scientifically backed precept that we only integrate new information if it can attach to pre-existing truths that have been accepted by the individual as fact.
"The law of association"

(i don't remember my own birth, but certainly don't consider it when pondering the question of my character or why i am who i am today)

How much of what you have experienced can you readily recall at will?
Do you believe knowledge of all you have experienced does not reside in memory form within your mind, or are those experiences simply suppressed?

..... and do we really need to supply man (that's mankind, not directed specifically to men or women) with any more excuses or reasons that they should not be held accountable for their own deeds?

Recognizing the root source of humanities personalities, opinions, idealisms, and perspectives does not imply impunity or relief from accountability for behaviours and actions.

in my opinion, it's easier to create an excuse FOR the behavior than to enact change IN the behavior.

But, if people (individuals) simply cannot process that their actions and behaviours are unacceptable because of the way they integrate and catalogue their environment, what needs to change ... if not the way they think?

i couldn't begin to speculate whether that stems from ....

You wouldn't be alone.

something i've observed equally in men and women:

how often will they admit when they are wrong?

I try to limit the amount of how many times I admit I'm wrong to no more than 3 times per day, as I am fearful of the detrimental effects it may have on how others view me, and my reputation.

would an example of 'WHY NOT' be considered a display of fear and self-preservation?

More than likely:
Maybe. Depends entirely on their intentions, not specific, but all encompassing intentions, their motivation ....

in your experience have people generally been indirect in their apologies, offering their remorse, but attempting to lay some of the blame on someone else, something else or the situation?

If their explanation is faulted, it is easy to debunk. But it is far more amusing to allow them to debunk themselves.

which person would you respect more? the person that admits fault and acknowledges a shortcoming, or the person that tries to make up an excuse?

Ideally it is most benificial to all to have an equal amount of respect for both. Both are learning or have learned. And, far be it for me to judge because I really don't know if the person who did not lie had done so 10,392 times before they learned that honesty is the best policy, where as the person who made the excuses may be lying for only the 6,201st time. Would I choose to spend more time out of respect with the one who knows, or the one who is learning?

i find it particularly interesting that you are a man asking for comment and opinion on this topic. i am not suggesting that your research or opinion on it would have been different, but i was intrigued to discover your gender later in the posts. can you explain more of your motivation behind the research? have any of the comments posted here confirmed what you already believed on the topic or expanded your view any?

My motivation for this research began with a time of self reflection. I have always enjoyed people watching and truly understanding people. I love nothing more than helping people and learning. I also experienced many things I either can not or can not put into words. I can see both the best in people, and vaguely recognize the worst in people.

Yes, comments posted here have both changed my views and enforced them. I truly would not keep coming back if it were a waste of my time, or percieved as such.

By the way,

I liked your post very much, and I'm glad you are here at ATS.

thank you for the 'welcome', i have enjoyed reading (and now participating)- i've randomly popped in all over the board, but haven't found one particular place that i prefer over another- big big forum here and so much to see!! really glad to be here!

so back to topic...

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher
The judicial system and courts of law in the land I live do not always agree with this statement. One's mental health as determined by professionals may even decide one is exempt from participating in thier own defense.

ah, but let's not forget the instances where, when faced with a lighter sentence, a guilty party might attempt to use 'professional' opinion regarding the state of their mental health to their advantage. for the sake of the original topic, let us assume it is not a crime or indiscretion serious enough to warrant the judicial system or mental evaluations, but everyday, general or overall 'bad behavior'. is that acceptable?

And yet, I have witnessed numerous times womens' behaviors and actions being excused and justified by chemical imbalances due to menstral cycles, and the effects the imbalances have on the process of rational thought, ie. behaviors and actions that were against what is usually tolerated in the workplace.

let's consider that 'bad' or irrational behavior within the workplace was severe enough to threaten the individual's job (ie. their personal security) wouldn't it then be to their benefit to maintain that this is a medical condition over which they have no control? if they can sustain the belief that they are not responsible for their actions (it was my hormones/mental condition/medical condition) then LEGALLY it puts an employer in a precarious position and may leave 'boss' open for discrimination suits, or accusations of unlawful termination, etc. (in the event that the behavior led to disciplinary action or job loss.) again, assuming that we are speaking only of reasonably sound individuals, and attempting to discern whether men are biologically predisposed to display more bad behavior than women, perhaps this illustration shows that women are just as susceptible to establishing excuses for their own behavior as men. (not to insinuate that valid medical conditions which affect behavior do not exist, but again, assuming we are speaking only of the reasonably sound average joe or jane who isn't very nice.)

How are we learning?

Through association?

Association to what?

i'll broaden that thought. we are learning through our words, actions, deeds...
we may come to associate a certain 'action' to certain 'reactions' from others.
if another reacts favorably, we might find that we begin to express with more frequency the characteristic which garners this type of response in an attempt to continue receiving positive feedback from others.
conversely, a negative reaction may deter us from repeating the behavior because we have discovered it meets with disapproval.

this partially ties into my note of the statement concerning people who will display different behaviors in varying social settings, i assume that the person has been quick to observe that what is acceptable in one social environment may not be acceptable in another.

if a person has a far greater need for acceptance from their peers than another possibly participating in similar behavior, wouldn't the person who needs to feel accepted learn to modify their behaviors based on the associations they form involving other people's approval or disapproval? could we then assume that a person that displays socially unacceptable behavior was limited based strictly on their gender? or is it possible that their culture, background or social interaction had an affect on their limitations?

we only integrate new information if it can attach to pre-existing truths that have been accepted by the individual as fact.
"The law of association"

i'd be interested in reading more about this... is this an actual 'law'? is the 'law of association' some sort of accepted scientific method of describing behavior? i'm having difficulty seeing the process of 'integrating new information' as something limited to our acceptance of previous information... the process of living throws us new curve balls all the time, and, at least in my experience, it seems at times that there is no prior truth or fact on which to attach or build.

The law of association by contiguity is as follows: "If a person experiences two environmental events (stimuli) at the same time or one right after the other (contiguously), those events will become associated in the person's mind, such that the thought of one will, in the future, tend to elicit the thought of the other" (Gray, 1999, p. 104).

www.brainmass.com...

the above is the only thing i've found that is even remotely related... this may not have been your intent in referencing 'the law of association'... did you expound on this in previous posts? if so, no worries- i'll go back and read again....

How much of what you have experienced can you readily recall at will?
Do you believe knowledge of all you have experienced does not reside in memory form within your mind, or are those experiences simply suppressed?

trick question!! trick question! LOL!

i'm an avid writer- so whilst i may not recall all the details of a particular event, a simple flip of the pages and there it all is- the good and the bad- even the things i've tried to suppress... i have exhibited behavior which i didn't understand at times, but after introspection and an occasional flip in the old dust collectors, i can say with certainty that my actions, whether i was consciously attempting to avoid similar situations to those i'd encountered previously or not, were an effort to avoid pain or upset. but can we REALLY assume that recall reaches as far back as the womb? there are some that think (and i ain't goin' look it up! LOL) that reading to the child before birth, or playing music to an unborn baby has the ability to increase the infant's intelligence and mental capacity... is this true? uh... i dunno! someone willing to put forth so much effort to mold a young life will likely be reading and interacting on a more advanced level with their child during their early developmental years-

i guess what i'm trying to point out is that EVERYONE is born, but not everyone develops in the same way to exhibit identical behavioral tendencies- therefore, i would think it nearly impossible to consider fear or pain experienced at birth as a factor contributing to today's thoughts and actions.

But, if people (individuals) simply cannot process that their actions and behaviours are unacceptable because of the way they integrate and catalogue their environment, what needs to change ... if not the way they think?

true dat...

I try to limit the amount of how many times I admit I'm wrong to no more than 3 times per day, as I am fearful of the detrimental effects it may have on how others view me, and my reputation.

LOL again!! ok, ok... yeah, we are all guilty of self-preservation! but i'd rather others find out from ME that i ain't perfect than figure it out for themselves!! (may as well get one in for the day... not perfect, nope.... not me!) seriously though, i would rather admit a fault, apologize and get through an awkward situation immediately rather than put it off... two weeks later it might not be a good idea to bring it up again- or 'the opportunity has passed'. i wouldn't consider someone else a 'bad person' if they don't uphold the same standard, though, but it communcates much to me about what kind of person they are if they do.

Would I choose to spend more time out of respect with the one who knows, or the one who is learning?

we're all learning- and are all blessed with different abilities, capacities, and levels of understanding- some may discover satisfaction in working with others with different understanding than their own- others may not have the patience required... we may align ourselves with folk making better decisions than we are in order to gain some of their knowledge and improve ourselves, or hang with underachievers so we won't feel inadequate.... the answer to that question, i don't have.... it's whatever makes us happy- and no one else can decide that on our behalf...

i appreciate your taking the time to answer and discuss all the opinion i've thrown out in this topic- these are simply my thoughts and observations without any expertise in psychology or human behavior... i have to admit, this has been very thought provoking- please continue! i've been enjoying this discussion!!

~amithyzt






[edit on 28-10-2005 by amithyzt]

I'm sorry this thread has become so random.

It is supposed be whats wrong with me...I mean Men not like their chemical scientific make up Geese.

Lol I here peeps talking like this:

"Well their bad behavior dates back to 1million BC when Adam bit out the bad tree." GET A GRIP PLEASE IF THAT IS ALL YOU CAN COME UP WITH THAT WRONG WITH US THAT IS STUPID!

I am the most idiotic male in history but think of me as kind of like ferris bueler. That who I act like.

Originally posted by Conspiracy Theorist06
GET A GRIP PLEASE IF THAT IS ALL YOU CAN COME UP WITH THAT WRONG WITH US THAT IS STUPID!

we don't have to agree with others who have a different point of view than our own, but i do feel we have an obligation to read, consider their point of view, also to rethink our own values from 'the other side', and if we choose to enter a debatable topic, be capable of discussing 'why or why not' in a logical manner that will encourage others to explain themselves more thouroughly until you both have reached an understanding. the result may not be that you agree with the other perspective, but you comprehend and respect another's views, even if they differ.

if this thread were more specifically 'about you', the author may have chosen to name the subject title more along the lines of 'women, here it is! what's wrong with conspiracy theorist06', but that is NOT what he chose, which leaves this topic open to include many broad concepts about men's behavior that don't apply to 'your life'. imo, it doesn't make the posts 'random' or 'stupid', but has clearly defined the scope of the thread before you ever chose to click on it.

if you do not agree that men's behavior is a result of genetics, or science, or biting an apple, let us hear some of the 'why or why not' instead of an abrupt conclusion that the entire exchange is 'stupid' or unworthy of your time. Ferris displayed a general disprespect for authority (ie. his parents, his friends parents, and principal)... true comparison in that sense, but i think he also had a knack for influencing others- a 'genuine ferris' would come up with more creative and ingenius ways to achieve his goals.

~amithyzt

It has been over a year since this thread was begun. My personal beliefs have changed some, however i still stand by a lot of the information presented in this thread, to include posts from members i may have not previously agreed with.

I just wondered if anyone else would care to weigh in on the subject matter, and offer their (your) personal views.

Thanks in advance,
john.

Well thanks to have started the debate, Esoteric teacher. ou might have realized that both mens and womens share that same complex, as they have had the same ego-shaping experiences during their early childhood.

I admit that fear is the very root off all the sh*t that can happen between two persons of more. Blended with egotism and love for another, this makes a devastating cocktail that can have bad consequences of many kinds and ranges on people. BUT both mens and womens have their way of indulging to fear.

Jealousy? Inhibition? Fear of being betrayed? It's all there in both mens and womens, only that men more tend to have the "active" approach, while womens are more often "passive". The only thing that's typical to mens is that stupid game of "who has the longest cock" and everything that relates to this game, like who gets the chick, who's the most intelligent, and who has the biggest success in life...

At the end of the line, I think the only choice that will make your quality as a men will be to play the stupid game or to just forfeit and follow something higher.

I am a guy (a "men", I do not pretend

[edit on 5/9/06 by Echtelion]

[edit on 5/9/06 by Echtelion]

You posted:


"At the end of the line, I think the only choice that will make your quality as a men will be to play the stupid game or to just forfeit and follow something higher."

Nicely said...thank you.

By the way..that game that men tend to play...Ive seen the women play something similar. "mine are bigger than yours." It gets pretty shallow too.

Thanks,
Orangetom

About the topic of this thread. Women are not all that good either. Just to say men are mean to women. Yes of course it happens. But dont forget about all the sluts and hoes out there. And even in there are not sluty. Women still are not perfect.