The Conspiracy against Manhood. , page 11

reply to post by orangetom1999

---

Orangetom, I have to applaud the amount of thought you put into your theory and your posts. And, reading them, you are indeed making some very accurate assessments about a certain sort of female. I would also like to recommend to you that you at some point read "The Genealogy of Morality" by Nietzsche. You might enjoy his description of "slave morality." He shares some of your criticisms of women.

That said, I would like to point out that both you and Nietzsche are making a bit of a mistake. You are mistaking a culturally instilled set of behaviours for inherent ones. Some women learn to manipulate and blink their eyes to assert some sort of power, or to achieve their ends because they are taught from a very young age that that is the only acceptable way to do so.

I grew up in Hawaii. And in the sticks. And I promise you, the women in my home town did not feel the need to blink their eyes to get the grass cut. They were raised more equitably, and encouraged to be physical, and even fight if the situation required. They took risks. They took the amount of power their individual nature and physical build suited them for. Some big Samoan girls would knock the holy crap out of the average guy from the mainland. That isnt a statement made in jest. It is something I have personally witnessed.

The nice thing about that arrangement, that style of living, is that people (not "men" or "women") PEOPLE, become the thing they are by nature meant to be. Are some females more gentle? Absolutely. And are some "titas?" (pidgen for rough or tomboy) Absolutely. But men get to be what they are too.

If you have such a poor opinion of what women are, I say stop hanging around with piss poor examples of women. If a woman judged all men by the guys she found drinking in the gutter, she would assume all men were losers. But they arent. There are fantastic men and women when you stop hanging around with the worst examples. (Although ceasing to hang around with the worst examples does necessitate a sometimes uncomfortable change in your underlying assumptions.)

I live in the mainland now. And on my block there are only two women out of about 14 that act like you say. My female neighbors cut the grass, and get up on the roof to repair the stucco, start the swamp cooler, (or at least to help do so.) I have an 81 year old neighbor who is about 5'3" who gets out and cuts the grass and the hedges. She and her husband did everything, everything, as a team. He died last fall and she nursed him at home with the help of hospice til the very end.

If you are associating with women who only know manipulation and second hand power, and the underhanded methodology that one must employ to assert that bastardized second hand power, then you are missing out on the chance to have a woman like my neighbor as a partner atthe end of your life. And that is YOUR choice. It says nothing about women in general. I pity the women who grow up thinking they have to cater to anyone or any system in order that they be "allowed" to do certain things. In order that they might find some "security." Security that is loaned to you by another is never security. You are always at the mercy of your benefactor.

I was fortunate that I was raised by people who were strong and comfortable with themselves. Strong women, who did what they wanted or were suited for, and strong men who didnt need to put them down or limit them in order to feel powerful themselves. Just as security that is "loaned" to you by another is not real security, power that you gain by dominion over another is not real power. Power is something that is yours, and is inherent in you as a birthright, or it is nothing at all. A game. A masquerade. Power isnt gained by bullying or acting like a buffoon. Those are the actions of the powerless, someone who has something to prove. Who needs someone else to acknowledge their position to validate it. True power is exhibited by not needing anyone or anything, any structure, or cultural set of circumstances, to tell you who and what you are. The most powerful people are gracious, and accepting of others. They can afford to be.

reply to post by mysterychicken

---

Mystery Chicken,

LOL LOL LOL...very intresting method you use in expressing your opinions and views. I agree with what you are saying. Well said.

I agree with your position that with Homogenization there is a loss of flavor. Very intresting method of expressing such a concept.

Also agree again in your concept that as men become more femminine they become less polite and kind..or what I call coarse. Well stated again.

Thanks,

Illusionsaregrander,

So you are a local boy..not a howlie??? Great. My fathers people are from Kailua, Kona on the Big Island and I know exactly the women to whom you refer. As stated in some of my earlier posts ..these women too are not shrinking violets.

You are mistaking a culturally instilled set of behaviours for inherent ones.

I have some difficulty here with this concept ..though I understand it somewhat. My problem is that there is a difference in culturally instilled behaviors and inherent ones in a day of mass marketing...pavlovian stimulus...unthinking response to stimulus...bright lights and all that dreck???
Do we even have much inhereted anymore..or is it rapidly becoming mass produced...xeroxed if you like?

I see more and more xerox type behaviors...than I do those inherent.
Am I wrong here??

Also...

Some women learn to manipulate and blink their eyes to assert some sort of power, or to achieve their ends because they are taught from a very young age that that is the only acceptable way to do so.

I am not quite sure that this is the template. To me it is more like it is expedient (less RISK)and they can often work or get it both ways....and without thet method ever seen the light of day by others. It is stealthy...subtle if you like.

There are women on my street who do indeed cut thier grass...and a couple of them keep beautiful yards..alot of work and thought has gone into thier propertys and I salute them for this. No problem here with me. Personally I hate cutting grass and doing yardwork..and I have alot of machines to helpe me accomplish this task.

The type of woman for whom I catch alot of flack from both the men and women on this and other similar kinds of threads need to be identified for many out here. Unfortunately by the responses of the men out here..I dont think this will change any time soon. It is also much more common than most will admit.

I am trying to remember..about this person you reference...Neitzsche...???

It has been awhile since I read a bio of him..did he not die in a asylum??
If this is the person of whom I am thinking....it has made me reluctant to read much of his material.

I am also thinking that one of his quotes is to the effect ...that when you stare into the darkness the darkness stares back at you.?? Or something to that effect. I thought it strange wording at the time.

Nonetheless..thanks for your storys of the Islands and its women. Yes I know about the Island women of whom you speak. They are my aunts and cousins. They are indeed a tough breed.

Thanks,
Orangetom


[edit on 23-5-2008 by orangetom1999]

reply to post by orangetom1999

---

Nietzsche did indeed die "crazy" although I think his family cared for him, however do not let that little fact dissuade you from reading that text. I feel quite confident that after hearing your hypothesis that you would enjoy and be enriched by reading it.

Many, many brilliant minds fall apart at some point in time. Among the most highly intelligent there is an unfortunate predisposition to depression or madness. I suppose when you are on the frontier of human understanding it is quite easy to make a misstep and become lost in the wilderness.

He is a bit hard on Christianity and Judaism, and if you are highly religious you may find that offensive, however if you could overlook that aspect as well he still has some incredibly insightful views on how individual or collective feelings of weakness (as you might phrase it, fear of risk or effort) affect ones behavior and feelings of "right or wrong" or morality. In my estimation Nietzsche's lumping of people into broad categories, (women, religious groups, etc) does limit his ability to communicate the message he is trying to convey, (which is a very valid one) but if the reader can look past his all too human failings in that regard, they can still gain quite bit from him.

And I am from Waianae. Way out on the west shore of O'ahu. In response to your point about the xerox-ing that is going on, I dont disagree with you that that is the case. Our culture DOES make it more comfortable to "fit in" to the roles assigned to you by your gender, ethnicity, economic position, etc. There absolutely is an attempt to penalize individuals who refuse or are unable to mold themselves into this acceptable form. However, there is also a penalty for compliance. Though one may gain acceptance and approval from others, this is often offset by a deep underlying unhappiness that you might also note pervades many "civilized" cultures. Look how many people medicate themselves, with psychiatric drugs, pain killers, alcohol and illegal drugs, excessive spending, immersion in work, too much television, etc. simply to avoid having to face the parts of themselves that have had to be sacrificed or repressed in order that they conform. We are being pressured to become something other than what we are, but it isnt entirely effective. Who we really are, inherently, does not go away quietly, it has to be beaten down almost daily.

Thats why "pockets" of people (like in my hometown) who have NOT been completely tamed yet are so valuable as control subjects. Even in Hawaii, as you move from the rural areas such as my town, into the cities and more civilized portions such as Honolulu, you can see the difference between the people. We made fun of "townies" for their unnaturalness, their game playing and "stiff" persona's. Same people, same ethnicity, but some were well on their way to being housebroken, domesticated, and in my little town growing up people were still less affected. More natural.

So then the question becomes what to do about this? My answer would not be to accept the roles and the generalizations that culture imposes to make us easier to herd around. It would be to be true to yourself, and if you didnt know who yourself was, to find that out. Refuse to become a xerox copy. You dont have to actively rebel and act like a fool to do so. (in the scope of this discussion, "radical femininsts" would fit that description.) Those rebels arent really themselves either, they are acting in opposition to the expected role, which is a role as well. Define the role you play yourself, based on your natural likes and dislikes or abilities. Some wont like it, but so what? Do you want to associate often with people who cannot accept you? I dont. And if I do have to associate with people like that, I dont care if they are uncomfortable with my not playing to their expectations. They will get over it, and I am happy in the meantime. I dont go out of my way to be in their face, I have nothing to prove, but aside from courtesy, (which is legendary in Polynesia, it is a very gracious culture with very strong ideas about how to treat others hospitably and honorably as you likely know) I dont feel the need to change who I am to please them either.

And I do agree with you that some women may believe that blinking their eyes and acting weak may be more expedient. (or conversely sitting on the couch waiting for someone else to make dinner and getting pissed off that it isnt ready yet) But that to me demonstrates their conditioning. It is far, far easier to get up and cut the grass yourself than sit around blinking and simpering, or whining and complaining, in hopes that someone else will do it. It is unfortunate that some have been deceived into thinking the other way is "easier." In my relationships, the work has always been divided based on who hates what least. (Or who is better at what, I am not allowed to touch the laundry after several shrinking and discoloring things accidents) Not the traditional male/female divide. And if someone cant do their normal chores due to illness or other (work) related issues, the one with more time picks up the slack til the circumstances revert to normal. It just isnt a big deal. If both are sick or busy, things go undone. Life goes on, it will get done eventually.

I have enjoyed your posts. It is always nice to exchange ideas with a thoughtful person.

Edit to correct circumstances of Nietzsche's death.

[edit on 23-5-2008 by Illusionsaregrander]

reply to post by princessjade

---

Men and women can be more accepting. I feel it is based on personality although perhaps women are more prone to be more accepting and go with the flow?

Jadeprincess,

It is also, to me, based on personality though I find this accepting fingerprint more common among women. I tend to look for the woman who is not stamped out in this arena. Pretty rare anymore...males too. My observation is that in becoming more accepting....both sexes are under intense bombardment to this type of conformity. It will wax worse and worse..the more people spend time in front of the boob tube, movies and public education. I dont put much stock in Churchs anymore for relief here as so many of them have switched to the sugary doctrines and practices..and taken the Salt out of their services.

Thanks,
Orangetom

reply to post by Shazam The Unbowed

---

Dude, we must have some kind of connection. I have been saying this for yrs now and every woman gets pissed at me for being too manly, too harsh, shut the f up already and let me be a man.

Look into breast cancer research, look at how much money is wasted on womans breast while men with prostate cancer die by the wayside. F breasts and all the damn walk-a-thons for womans breasts. What about man, woman do not have a prostate, only men do.

reply to post by stinkhorn

---

Originally posted by stinkhorn
reply to post by Shazam The Unbowed

---

Look into breast cancer research, look at how much money is wasted on womans breast while men with prostate cancer die by the wayside. F breasts and all the damn walk-a-thons for womans breasts. What about man, woman do not have a prostate, only men do.

As a breast cancer survivor, I find your remarks cruel and offensive. Breast cancer research is not about a woman breast. It is about saving lives. Just as testicular and prostate cancer research is about saving lives. All cancer research is about saving lives.

Women’s breasts have a purpose, to nourish the children she gives birth to. They are not just some decoration to entertain men. Due to hormonal changes through out a woman’s life, the breasts happen to be one of the places where women (and some men) get cancer. Cancer research is not about a particular body part. It is about learning the best course of treatment for a particular type of cancer.

Please do a little research before you make such outrageous remarks.

Breast cancer is a cancer that starts in the cells of the breast.[1] Worldwide, breast cancer is the second most common type of cancer after lung cancer (10.4% of all cancer incidence, both sexes counted)[2] and the fifth most common cause of cancer death.[3] Worldwide, breast cancer is by far the most common cancer amongst women, with an incidence rate more than twice that of colorectal cancer and cervical cancer and about three times that of lung cancer. However breast cancer mortality worldwide is just 25% greater than that of lung cancer in women.[2] In 2005, breast cancer caused 502,000 deaths worldwide (7% of cancer deaths; almost 1% of all deaths).[3] The number of cases worldwide has significantly increased since the 1970s, a phenomenon partly blamed on modern lifestyles in the Western world.[4][5]
The incidence of breast cancer varies greatly around the world, being lower in less-developed countries and greatest in the more-developed countries. In the twelve world regions, the annual age-standardised incidence rates per 100,000 women are as follows: in Eastern Asia, 18; South Central Asia, 22; sub-Saharan Africa, 22; South-Eastern Asia, 26; North Africa and Western Asia, 28; South and Central America, 42; Eastern Europe, 49; Southern Europe, 56; Northern Europe, 73; Oceania, 74; Western Europe, 78; and in North America, 90.[6]
Women in the United States have the highest incidence rates of breast cancer in the world; 141 among white women and 122 among African American women.[7][8] Among women in the US, breast cancer is the most common cancer and the second-most common cause of cancer death (after lung cancer).[8] Women in the US have a 1 in 8 (12.5%) lifetime chance of developing invasive breast cancer and a 1 in 35 (3%) chance of breast cancer causing their death.[8] In 2007, breast cancer was expected to cause 40,910 deaths in the US (7% of cancer deaths; almost 2% of all deaths).[9]
Source

Prostate cancer is a disease in which cancer develops in the prostate, a gland in the male reproductive system. It occurs when cells of the prostate mutate and begin to multiply out of control. These cells may spread (metastasize) from the prostate to other parts of the body, especially the bones and lymph nodes. Prostate cancer may cause pain, difficulty in urinating, erectile dysfunction and other symptoms.
Rates of prostate cancer vary widely across the world. Although the rates vary widely between countries, it is least common in South and East Asia, more common in Europe, and most common in the United States.[1] According to the American Cancer Society, prostate cancer is least common among Asian men and most common among black men, with figures for white men in-between.[2][3] However, these high rates may be affected by increasing rates of detection.[4]
Prostate cancer develops most frequently in men over fifty. This cancer can occur only in men, as the prostate is exclusively of the male reproductive tract. It is the most common type of cancer in men in the United States, where it is responsible for more male deaths than any other cancer, except lung cancer. In the UK it is also the second most common cause of cancer death after lung cancer. Around 35,000 men in the UK are diagnosed per year; where around 10,000 die of it. However, many men who develop prostate cancer never have symptoms, undergo no therapy, and eventually die of other causes. That is because malignant neoplasms of the prostate are, in most cases, slow-growing, and because most of those affected are over 60. Hence they often die of causes unrelated to the prostate cancer, such as heart/circulatory disease, pneumonia, other unconnected cancers or old age. Many factors, including genetics and diet, have been implicated in the development of prostate cancer.
Prostate cancer is most often discovered by physical examination or by screening blood tests, such as the PSA (prostate specific antigen) test. There is some current concern about the accuracy of the PSA test and its usefulness. Suspected prostate cancer is typically confirmed by removing a piece of the prostate (biopsy) and examining it under a microscope. Further tests, such as X-rays and bone scans, may be performed to determine whether prostate cancer has spread.
Prostate cancer can be treated with surgery, radiation therapy, hormonal therapy, occasionally chemotherapy, proton therapy, cryosurgery, or some combination of these. The age and underlying health of the man as well as the extent of spread, appearance under the microscope, and response of the cancer to initial treatment are important in determining the outcome of the disease. Since prostate cancer is predominantly a disease of older men, many will die of other causes before a slowly advancing prostate cancer can spread or cause symptoms. This makes treatment selection difficult.[5] The decision whether or not to treat localized prostate cancer (a tumor that is contained within the prostate) with curative intent is a patient trade-off between the expected beneficial and harmful effects in terms of patient survival and quality of life.
Source

I vote we continue in all cancer research!

reply to post by stinkhorn

---

Did you know that when new drugs are in the human testing phase that it is mainly men who are tested? Wanna know why? Since women have menstrual cycles and men don't, that's just one less "variable" to have to adjust for. All the doses for drugs are based on what would work on a 150# man. Do you know how many women have been screwed up by that dosing system? And by NOT accounting for the hormonal differences between the sexes?
Everyone knows the warning signs of a heart attack: crushing chest pain that may or may not radiate down the arm, into the jaw, back or shoulder, nausea, vomiting, diaphoresis (sweating), shortness of breath, etc. Those are the warning signs for MALES. Warning signs of heart attack in females is usually fatigue. That's it. Since all the women I know are chronically overworked and fatigued all the time anyway, how in the hell are we supposed to differentiate? We're not because only the information for males is presented, not for women. Most women think they're just tired because no one ever told them that they probably won't have all the male signs of a heart attack and so they don't seek help. They take a nap and die in their sleep.
Talk about a conspiracy! Apparently it's not important to try to save women's lives; just mens. "F breasts"? I have a few choice sentiments to reply to that callous remark but they would all get me banned.

It is becoming increasingly evident to me that there are a lot of whiney, cry-baby (so-called) men that sound a lot like Cartman on South Park: Respect mah authori tie. Be someone worthy of respect and you will be respected. Piss and moan that "life's not fair, waaa for me" and you'll still get all you DESERVE.

reply to post by Question

---

Question,
I have not checked this thread in a few days but wanted to let you know that I agree with the premise of your post and also of Hotbakedtater you quote.
I dont see alot of manly men out here either. I see alot of second hand men or what passes for men.

I too am not into fighting and am somewhat of a Pacifist...with certain reservations. I never went around looking for fights and tried mostly to avoid them. Still do. I dont consider fighting worth much of my time. Never did. I would rather spend my time and efforts with something more constructive than fighting.

I too have a martial arts background..but go around alot today with my good friend Sam Colt. Not looking for trouble..but there is getting to be more and more wildlife around this city than in years past.

Yes..you definitely want your children to be able to stand up for themselves..not just in fighting skills but daily in thier occupations with honesty and integrity. This too is fighting ..our daily labors...fighting to remain on the straight and narrow so to speak. By this I also mean ..male and female.

Thanks for your post,
Orangetom

Did Carl Sagan know something?
  Posted 18 days ago with 276 member flags

The Devil\'s Chord: The conspiracy to open the portal of consciousness and mystery of the octave
  Posted 3 days ago with 158 member flags

The Coca Cola Conspiracy: The secret cause for the U.S. obesity epidemic
  Posted 14 days ago with 139 member flags

Earthly coincidences...or not.
  Posted 14 days ago with 122 member flags

Was this the real reason why Megaupload was closed down?
  Posted 19 days ago with 96 member flags

The Mysterious Death of Marilyn Monroe
  Posted 17 days ago with 85 member flags

Bank of America DOES NOT accept U.S. DOLLARS as payment on mortgages
  Posted 7 days ago with 85 member flags

Denver Airport Allows Camera Crew in Underground Facility
  Posted 16 days ago with 83 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: