The Conspiracy against Manhood. , page 7

privacy

Pages: << 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 14 times

reply posted on 9-5-2008 @ 05:37 PM by eye open doors

So tell me, can you recognise the ignorance in yourself?

Yes, I seek it out.

reply posted on 9-5-2008 @ 05:49 PM by whitewave

reply to post by Shazam The Unbowed

LMAO here. I have been in several life-threatening situations; almost all of them involving men. I have never lost a fight in my life. I could start a whole other thread regalling you with stories of all the ways I've kicked male hiney. I've fought one guy that had a gun aimed at my head. I fought another guy that was charging me with an ax. ACED my anatomy and physiology, baby! Works every time. Then I learned martial arts. Woe and pain to the man (or woman) who thinks I'm to be trifled with.

Displays of my violent side are not for public consumption so I would never consider going on ultimate fighting championship (although I've picked up a few moves from watching it).

Got tired of waiting for my son-in-law to move my refrigerator or couch so I could clean behind it. Found that by putting wheels on them, I don't have to wait. Simple physics.

If all a woman needed or wanted was brawn, she could train an ape to move heavy objects pr employ wheels, levers, pulleys, etc. Men need to be more than muscles, just as women need to be more than T&A. As long as both sexes persist in this one-upsmanship nonsense, the senseless battle will continue.

O.T.
I am familiar with many of your views on this topic from other threads in which you've expressed your opinions. Unlike many of the nay-sayers here, I recognize that what you're saying is not an expression of self-loathing or misandryist (sp?) hatred. One point in which I disagree is that of risks. If a woman foregoes a career and material ambitions for a man's career and material ambitions, that is a tremendous risk to her.

For instance: she never goes to college but instead works so that he can go to college and earn a good living for them. She risks cranking out the babies as well as insanity from doing the majority of raising them. She forfeits her "marketability" in looks, health, figure and strength to do so. Now, Mr. Prosperity who is educated, skilled, experienced and sitting pretty financially and in terms of marketability decides to leave his drudge of a wife, who has lost her figure birthing his children, for some cuter and younger bit of fluff. Even if she gets child support and/or alimony, she has forever forfeited her chance to get any sort of edge in the job market. Her chances of attaining a comfortable life style ever again are slim, fat and none. Her chances of finding some cuter and younger bit of fluff are non-existent. Who took the risk here? (btw, this is not bitter past experience speaking here. it had to be said.)

I think a lot of women know what they want in life. I think they know very well where they want to go. They just want someone else to take them there and often, that someone else is male. I've also witnessed the equally unhealthy trend of males these days expecting to be taken care of by a female. Perhaps my experience of working with co-dependent rescuer type personalities (nurses) has skewed the conclusions of my observations but I hear whinning all day long about cads who are behaving very badly.

I've had sick, broke, unattractive men ask me to marry them because they wanted a free healthcare worker. What stunned me about these so-called proposals was that these jerks who had nothing to offer honestly thought they were doing me a favor. *shudders* I don't like to hurt anyone's feelings but, knowing that the only "feeling" they had for me was greed and self-service, it's hard not to push them out of their wheelchairs and down the steps! Sheesh!

Women are not commodities to be used up and disposed of as soon as we are no longer shiney and new. Men are not walking wallets required to open to us every time we want some bling. Equal in life. Equal in our need for respect. Equal in our humanity. And hopefully, equal in decency.

reply posted on 10-5-2008 @ 12:19 AM by orangetom1999

Eyes,

That is not how I read your post.

I said babies are the purest form of love on this earth. Many a newborn has thawed the heart of a fool. I believe that people shouldn't even have sex unless they intend to have child. If they intend to have a child they should be prepared to sacrafice a lot of meaningless ways.

I have come to this through experience and watching people around me who have made decisions that have affected them, their children, and the whole community.

Here is your quote.

Speaking of mothers, and raising children. I had the differences between the sexes put to me as this. Women are smaller in stature because the womb saps energy from the woman. This energy is used to bear the babies, which by the way is the purest form of love on earth.

I may be reading the punctuation incorrectly but I read this statement as saying that the energy used to bear the babies is the purest form of love on earth. Am I misreading here....can we get a translation of this quote posted above based on the punctuation??? Anyone???

It reads to me..that the difference in the sexes is the energy used to bear the babies...which is the purest form of love on earth. The energy ..not the babies.

However...I do agree..people make decisions which affect them...and of course their offspring too.
I believe people should sacrafice for thier offspring. No problem with this. I dont agree when one gender so often defaults through without the risks. As I said earlier ..we are going to find this out at $5 plus per gallon.

Shazam,

about hunting...

Yes, but women raised on fashion magazines and shoe catalogues will.

I never claimed they would. I stated that many of the men would be right there with the women...waiting for someone to flashdance them through the problems. A handful of knowlegable and willing men would be taking the risks for these people. One of my nightmares is to be stuck on a deserted island with a bunch of men who know mostly how to watch television and play video games. The women mostly how to shop and order on line or by telephone. What a nightmare!!

I Know this because..I get alot of these "Males" on different jobs and they... like many women ...must text message their way through the night and aspects of the job. These guys are quite femminine. All of them no...but the numbers of them like this are increasing rapidly.

Ahh yes, the old "who needs a man when you've got a vibrator" argument.
Not impressed.

You are correct here Shazam..quite correct. I am not impressed either. This statement of yours here is really wimpy...almost desperate to make a point and limping along with a cliche. Sorry dude but I think you capable of much better clarity than this. Check your gun see if it has tostesterone in it. Ive seen you make much better points than this so I know you capable. Stay on target...in the X ring.

I never said women were lesser, just that they are weaker, and as such, would not do as well as men and physical tasks.

I too never said that women were lesser..I said that this system treats men as lesser...mostly through a mans ignorance about everything including his manhood...ie maleness. I am also saying ...why would a woman ever have any desire to compete with men in physical tasks when they can get a man to do physical tasks for them as if it is a mans idea with which to begin. This is alot of female power....ie...girl stuff religion.
To many women out here ..getting a man to do it as if it was his idea is the same thing to them as if they did it themselves. They accomplished the goal of getting the task done....without risk. They got the male to run for the touchdown for them. That is alot of power Shazam.

You keep going on as if this is a level playing field and the male has alot to boast about. I dont think so. If a man has so much to boast about ..or strut..why the title of this thread??

As far as I am concerned ..what passes for manhood/maleness in this country is very overated. I find it the same for womanhood.

I also never said ..that men should accept a womans values or value system. That is in fact one of my pet peeves with alot of women...the attempt to substitute her value system for mine..while I am taking the risks for both systems.
I dont have a problem with making certain changes for a woman if she in fact offers certain value to me. I do have a problem if she offers ..."The appearance of value." in lieu of real value. These are two distinctively different things. They are not the same. Beauty and sexuality in a woman are not real lasting value to me. Also i dont have to take up with a woman to gain access to these.

about the car/van in my earlier post

Or pehaps he simply wanted to do soemthing nice. Naturally, being a willing slave, you assume she "manipulated him".

Could be ..possible he wanted to do something nice. However...tonight this same guy told me his woman wanted him to take her to Pennsylvania to see her family...in the van. According to him...he told her ..not a problem ..if she pays for the gasoline. I shook his hand and congratulated him. Maybe there is hope for him yet grasshopper!! If he sticks to his guns...well..took him long enough.
As to getting the van...I dont assume she manipulated him since I know he volunteered into at least half of the decision on his own. He bears as much of the responsibility as does she. I believe in equality here. But who once again is assuming the RISK??? Understand?? I dont believe that she is making the van payments. Do you??

What is going to happen if she must assume the RISK for the gasoline for the trip?? Ive done this to several women ...amazing how quickly a idea or concept dies on the vine when thier is no "safety net " to fall into in case things dont work out.

Risk...Shazam...Risk....not tostesterone is what seperates many men from many women.

Depends on the store. I go into cabella or Bass pro shoppes and theres more "male" florspace.

LOL LOL LOL...this is about the only place. I submit to you that in places which seem to be male stores..like Lowes and Home depot..the men are purchasing products to earn moneys for their familys or taking directions from their women to make the home a better place. It is into the springtime now...going into summer. Watch all the men in Lowes and Home Depot taking directions and loading the heavy yard products for their women. LOL LOL..this is a guy store. Especially on the weekends.
Remember..this is a patriarchial society. LOL LOL...man stuff is happening. LOL LOL.

I dont have alot of use for Cabellas or Bass pro shops. I go in there only to get what I want and get out. It is the same to me with a shopping mall. I get what I want and get out. Most of cabellas and bass pro's merchandize I can get lots of other places...or even order on line.
I definitely dont buy guns or ammunition those places. I use Midway and often reload/roll my own.
Now they do definitely have large rolls of fishing line..of most types. I will give them that . But I can order that too on line...lots of places.

Caballero,

You have no respect for men or yourself and it shows from your posts. men are just as valuable and intelligent as woman are the only differences that men and woman have are physical and instinctual differences.

I said dont have respect for alot of what passes for manhood today.. I never said I have no respect for men. I know men I respect greatly ..women too for that matter.

I happen to think that men are just as valuable as women and this social structure does not conduct itself as if men are as valuable...by using or misusing default settings to justify inequality..in a manner imperceptable to most men.

I also think that tostesterone is not the yardstick for men to boast. I also said ..that physical means little when a woman can get a man to take care of the physical for them. 'They dont need or care to be physical in the manner of a man. Why should they?? Ever ask a woman about this concept?? " Ask a woman some time....if they will even be truthful about it.
Remember the safety net concept. Many women are not likely to want to jeopardize the safety net with anything like truth.

Thanks,
Orangetom

reply posted on 10-5-2008 @ 01:05 AM by orangetom1999

reply to post by whitewave

LOL LOL Whitewave,

Im busting out laughing at your post. Pretty much my sentiments. I too have no intrest in that ultimate fighting program and quickly use my remote to bypass it when it comes up on the dial. I too have a background in martial arts and know that the test of skill is often how well one uses thier opponents strength against them. Not brute force against brute force..but momentum management. Which by the way ...is precisely what I am describing in many a women's ability to get a man to do the hard physical labor as if it was the mans idea in the first place. Momentum management.

I believe I told you in other conversations ..I bought the woman I see..a .357 magnum revolver. Showed her how to use it too. Mind you now it is loaded with .38 specials for recoil but if you know what you are doing ..a .38 special will work just fine. I dont believe I told you that I also bought her an AK 47. She now knows how to use it too. She didnt really like the SKS I bought her. I now use the SKS.
She now has this fall back position if need be..but on the other hand ..she has much better people skills than do I.

Putting the wheels on that refrigerator...great idea..simple and adaptive. Well done. It follows perfectly the KISS principle..Keep It Simple Stupid!!

If all a woman needed or wanted was brawn, she could train an ape to move heavy objects pr employ wheels, levers, pulleys, etc. Men need to be more than muscles, just as women need to be more than T&A. As long as both sexes persist in this one-upsmanship nonsense, the senseless battle will continue.

I agree with this in its entirety....it is in the X ring..nice shooting.

One point in which I disagree is that of risks. If a woman foregoes a career and material ambitions for a man's career and material ambitions, that is a tremendous risk to her.

This is not the point I am makinig Whitewave about risk. This is a point many women use in what I call..stereotyping.
The point I am making is that most women by female socialization are not conditioned to take huge risks for a man....outside of social beliefs and expectations. It just isnt done by most women.

If this were so...more women would be taking out insurance policys for their men in case they die first.
Socially ..almost nothing a woman brings to a man is protected in case she dies first. In or out of marriage. No safety net here.

Women who have careers or not... do not usually marry down the economic ladder..but up...this is not socially acceptable to most women...but up is ok. Why?? ...Risk.

My point is that women as a whole will take risks for themselve and thier gain if they have no other way. They will often get a man to do it for them if a man is around...by one means or another. Men often volunteer for this means for various reasons not fully understanding that it often makes them expendable and disposable...to their unawareness to their detriment.

What you are describing Whitewave is a womans insecuritys. This because of a lack of fall back position in case life doesnt work out. A safety net. Marketability. The ability to hit reset on the video game. I dont have alot of time for that in women..nor men for that matter. I like a woman who is sure of themselves and has the "P" word..potential well beyond todays cheap merchandizing. It is no less than what most women expect from a man. A woman like this is a real Pearl. A rare gem..a lovely drink of fine wine. Quite rare...at any age.

You know what I do for a living...as well as do I you. You know with intimate closeness..with familiarity ...what risks you take for your hard earned moneys...for your family. I admire and respect this in a woman...in you.

You are quite correct here....and nicely stated.

Women are not commodities to be used up and disposed of as soon as we are no longer shiney and new. Men are not walking wallets required to open to us every time we want some bling. Equal in life. Equal in our need for respect. Equal in our humanity. And hopefully, equal in decency.
.

To me what passes for much womanhood as well as manhood today is obscene..even pornographic....in its disfunctionality....and it is waxing worse with whorish merchandizing...male and female.

Thank you Whitewave for your posts.

Orangetom

[edit on 10-5-2008 by orangetom1999]

reply posted on 10-5-2008 @ 01:09 AM by darkelf

Whitewave, very nicely put. I have never let gender roles hold me back from doing anything I wanted. As I said in my earlier post, mutual respect is more important than equality. This silliness of which gender is more valuable to a society is simply a wedge to drive us further apart. Most men are physically stronger than most women. I’ve taken down men who are bigger than me on the mat and in RL. And a woman with a gun, who knows how to use, it is just as dangerous as any big strong male.

I don’t want equality, I want respect.

reply posted on 10-5-2008 @ 02:11 AM by eye open doors

It reads to me..that the difference in the sexes is the energy used to bear the babies...which is the purest form of love on earth. The energy ..not the babies

I meant the babies. I know, my punctuation is lacking.

reply posted on 10-5-2008 @ 12:54 PM by orangetom1999

Originally posted by eye open doors

It reads to me..that the difference in the sexes is the energy used to bear the babies...which is the purest form of love on earth. The energy ..not the babies

I meant the babies. I know, my punctuation is lacking.

Eyes,

No problem. My punctuation too is very lacking ..so too with my grammer, syntax and just plain olde. worn out typing fingers.

I still stand by what I said about abortion. Abortion too is a placebo..a phoney that many women have bought into. It does however put huge holes in this concept of "The purest form of love on earth."

Thanks,
Orangetom

reply posted on 10-5-2008 @ 02:47 PM by orangetom1999

Hey..Eyes,

I got to re reading this thread some pages back and found this.

Originally posted by eye open doors So why is it that women are commonly undervalued in society even though they bear children?

I can't buy into this mantra. It is easily passed onto most men...especially by women based on most mens natural ..non thinking nature.

Undervalued...where from does this nonsense come. Go back and look at my previous post. In one of them I mentioned a 6 or 7 to 1 ratio of floor space dedicated to women and womens products in the stores.
Yet the common mantra, in addition to undervalued, is that women dont earn as much money as men...hence support to the undervalued concept.
All a man has to do is pull his head out of his backside and break the mental chains put on him by default. If women as a whole are not making as much moneys as are men for the same work..who is paying for all this merchandize at 6 or 7 to one ratios??? It cant be the women ...correct????
It isnt the children and it is definitely not the politicians.
It must be the men Eyes...!!! One need not be a rocked scientist to come to this conclusion.
Women in this country determine the types of homes purchased...the cars bought..how the children are clothed...or clothes purchased...etc etc..etc.

The male as I stated only earn the moneys...often at great RISK..to their persons. It is the women who primarily determine how the moneys are spent. Not the males. This is not undervalued and it most certainly is not "Victimization."
Who or whom do you and the readers on this thread think is supporting all these Home shopping channels on the boob tube..if women dont earn as much moneys as men...you know..fashions and jewelry??? You know..undervalued???

When a man pulls his head out of the deep end of his backside and starts thinking outside of the limits of sports and hooters...this mantra of undervalued begins to shred quickly.

One more point which needs clarification...because of the ignorance and stupidity fostered in it by both males and females.

I didn't know for certain, but it sounded good when it was explained to me. His point was that men who hit women are jerks because women have wombs and men are stronger.

I need to clarify a concept here by taking a statement like this further to make plain the character and sexism and defaults claimed by the OP on this thread. This will also make clear to those who can see ...the nature of the Conspiracy against manhood.

The quote has to do with men abusing women...this is standard mantra...on most femminist and or women type posts along with sex and cheating.

My point here is about violence and abuse. Unclaimed and ignored by almost everyone even males...is that most violence is male on male..not male on female. Yet.....due to the CONSPIRACY" of silence surrounding this concept...this violence is not decried at all..hardly a wimper anywhere. What is decried is when men abuse women. This is not only a conspiracy ..it is also sexism.
The fact that most violence is male on male is totally ignored. Hence also giving creedance to my point about Male Disposability and Expendability.
Men and women are both stupid in this for which I am describing. I dont support violence or abuse against women..I also dont support violence or abuse against men.

I stand by my point once again...women abuse men often by getting men to take risks for them and often for frivolous goals. The men are often oblivious to this and think it is normal conduct ..male and female..it is not.
When I earn my moneys ...often at great risk....there is nothing frivolous about it.
Any woman who attempts to get me to take on her values and her goals/purchases without proper consideration of the RISKS ..is abusing me.
It is no different to me than if she hit me...

For the reasons explained above..I also have little intrest in sports and sports conditioning. I am not intrested in a womans clues and cues to perform for her for frivolous goals. I am also not intrested in watching two guys going at each other in a boxing ring or teams beating each other up on a playing field. I also find the advertising formats insulting around these sports events.
Actually ..to be fair about this..I find much of television now days ..insulting. It is a sad state of affairs when the advertising tack is more original than the regular programing.

Well ..hope some of you get my points here.

Thanks,
Orangetom

[edit on 10-5-2008 by orangetom1999]

reply posted on 10-5-2008 @ 07:52 PM by caballero

Originally posted by darkelf
I don’t want equality, I want respect.

thats the underlying value of this whole argument woman should be respected not equalized. respected in the sense that they would have the same opportunities as men would without being treated like a man. because it is obvious men and women arent equal in physical nature why would they be equal in all walks of life? like combat, stupid idead to let woman fight a war when its stupid to let the men fight that war. Its dangerous, not logical, and would most likely cause more problems than it would solve. Equality is not possible, respect however should be universal.

reply posted on 10-5-2008 @ 08:56 PM by sarcastic

I don't see any reason to perform for small minds.

Public school is all about being small minded and only attending to details, not looking at the Big Picture.

There are certain details I'm willing to take the time to master; otherwise I would have quit school last year. Accounting and Law are useful, so is the time I spend in Computer Lab.

I'm not going to sit through endless arguments about Evolution versus Creation or Conservatism versus Liberalism. %&#( that.

The rest is for girls who will never take initiatives, only clean up after people all their lives.

Like my mom.

reply posted on 10-5-2008 @ 11:35 PM by eye open doors

This silliness of which gender is more valuable to a society is simply a wedge to drive us further apart.

Perhaps my choice of the word value could have been more aptly conveyed with another term. I will clarify my intent.

Women bear the babies. The zygote is one circle within another circle. The womb. The circle that is within a circle, is within another circle. The mothers body. The circle that is within a circle, which is within a circle is within another circle. The world.

Like a strange loop, we'll start at the beginning again. The woman is penetrated by the male. The sperm penetrates the zygote. The sperm serves a supportive role. The male serves as a supportive role in creating the sperm.

If the man goes against the supportive role, the growing child within is affected. The woman who is pregnant is vulnerable. The woman is more emotional. The purest form of love is limited through the lack of intent of the parents. The actions of both parties ripple outward and inward.

One can replace the word love with potential. Within the womb of every pregnant woman lies potential to heal the ills of the world. If abused that healing can form into harm. So when I say women are more valuable to society, it is out of the greatest respect.

Undervalued...where from does this nonsense come.

By mens blindness as to what woman is. I speak from experience. I have be acquainted with too many married men that just play in their relationships. They complain about them, the cheat on them, they take advantage of them, they abuse the sanctity of their role.

Go back and look at my previous post. In one of them I mentioned a 6 or 7 to 1 ratio of floor space dedicated to women and womens products in the stores.

Women tend to place more importance on looking attractive. I feel that biology plays a roll in this.

who is paying for all this merchandize at 6 or 7 to one ratios??? It cant be the women ...correct????

The power struggle in an unhealthy relationship creates harmful interactions. Such as an unwillingness to share vulnerability in the bed. Or demanding money, or denial of money if said vulnerability is withheld.

It must be the men Eyes...!!! One need not be a rocked scientist to come to this conclusion.

Both the sexes are accountable individually in a relationship.

Women in this country determine the types of homes purchased...the cars bought..how the children are clothed...or clothes purchased...etc etc..etc.

Women tend to place more importance on such things. However, i have a male friend (A preemptive: who is not gay) that places a lot of importance on how his home looks. The walls are color coordinated. The wood all matches. Everything is designer. So forth and so on.

The male as I stated only earn the moneys...often at great RISK..to their persons.

Not always, but I feel the role interactions are beginning to be more intermixed. Infact i believe these role shifts are going to create even more confusion and fear within society that is set in it's ways.

Who or whom do you and the readers on this thread think is supporting all these Home shopping channels on the boob tube..

Comsumers. I have male friends that like to shop just as much as any woman. I also have two males friends that have full custody of their children because the mother is a dead beat. One of the mothers just gave them up, because she didn't want the responsibility.

women abuse men often by getting men to take risks for them and often for frivolous goals.

In a healthy relationship which honors a partnership, such things as money are miniscule. Interpersonal risk is far more important to a relationship.

[edit on 5/10/2008 by eye open doors]

reply posted on 11-5-2008 @ 12:00 AM by Shazam The Unbowed

Originally posted by whitewave

LMAO here. I have been in several life-threatening situations; almost all of them involving men. I have never lost a fight in my life.

Then you are either lieing, or you have never been in one. I've known champion fighters, olympic wrestlers, Army MMA fighters, and Black Belts, and not opne of these legitimate badasses could honestly say they ad never lost a fight.

I could start a whole other thread regalling you with stories of all the ways I've kicked male hiney. I've fought one guy that had a gun aimed at my head. I fought another guy that was charging me with an ax. ACED my anatomy and physiology, baby! Works every time. Then I learned martial arts. Woe and pain to the man (or woman) who thinks I'm to be trifled with.

Sure. Ive met cynthia rothtock, Mouse Mallone, and Laila Ali. Everyone one of whom was a supremely well conditioned, and trained, woman. I asked everyone of them what they would do if attacked by a man with similar training.
"Surprise him with an attack and run like hell" was the consensus response.

Now is it possible that a well trained woman seriously attcking a man with no training could do damage? Yes of Course. But at thye end of the day, When a Good Big guy a good small guy, the small guy looses. If theres a skill differential, or meanness differential, or willingness differential, then sizer isnt so important. But all other things being equal, size does matter. Or to put it more bluntly, No matter how badass a woman may htink she is, a male badass will kick the # out of her.

If all a woman needed or wanted was brawn, she could train an ape to move heavy objects pr employ wheels, levers, pulleys, etc. Men need to be more than muscles, just as women need to be more than T&A. As long as both sexes persist in this one-upsmanship nonsense, the senseless battle will continue.

WHat like the oneupmanship bull# you spent the last four paragraphs on?

O.T.
I am familiar with many of your views on this topic from other threads in which you've expressed your opinions. Unlike many of the nay-sayers here, I recognize that what you're saying is not an expression of self-loathing or misandryist (sp?) hatred. One point in which I disagree is that of risks. If a woman foregoes a career and material ambitions for a man's career and material ambitions, that is a tremendous risk to her.

For instance: she never goes to college but instead works so that he can go to college and earn a good living for them. She risks cranking out the babies as well as insanity from doing the majority of raising them. She forfeits her "marketability" in looks, health, figure and strength to do so. Now, Mr. Prosperity who is educated, skilled, experienced and sitting pretty financially and in terms of marketability decides to leave his drudge of a wife, who has lost her figure birthing his children, for some cuter and younger bit of fluff. Even if she gets child support and/or alimony, she has forever forfeited her chance to get any sort of edge in the job market. Her chances of attaining a comfortable life style ever again are slim, fat and none. Her chances of finding some cuter and younger bit of fluff are non-existent. Who took the risk here? (btw, this is not bitter past experience speaking here. it had to be said.)

And you raise a good point. A woman who forgoes education or work to raise a family or take care of a home takes a massive risk. Furhtermore the man saves an enormous extra amount, since she performs services worth substansially more than most would suppose. (think clean thoughts chums) I have no doubt that such women deserve substansial compensation. Whether they deserve half the mans wealth is debatable depending on his level of worth, but she does deserve compensation for the reduced lifetime expected income.

I think a lot of women know what they want in life. I think they know very well where they want to go. They just want someone else to take them there and often, that someone else is male.

In the vein of what you wrote above my Grandad once told me "never get in a car with someone you dont trust. Cause no matter where they say they are gonna take you, once you get in, they will take you whereever they choose to." In other words, if you depend on someone else to get you there, then accept you aren't in control of the itinerary.

I've also witnessed the equally unhealthy trend of males these days expecting to be taken care of by a female. Perhaps my experience of working with co-dependent rescuer type personalities (nurses) has skewed the conclusions of my observations but I hear whinning all day long about cads who are behaving very badly.

I dont get that. I couldnt do that, even though when young I had several offers from older women. (married) However, If a couple chooses to have only one income, then thats thier choice. I just can't personally respect any man who lives like that.

I've had sick, broke, unattractive men ask me to marry them because they wanted a free healthcare worker. What stunned me about these so-called proposals was that these jerks who had nothing to offer honestly thought they were doing me a favor. *shudders* I don't like to hurt anyone's feelings but, knowing that the only "feeling" they had for me was greed and self-service, it's hard not to push them out of their wheelchairs and down the steps! Sheesh!

So losers are a universal phenomonon.

Women are not commodities to be used up and disposed of as soon as we are no longer shiney and new. Men are not walking wallets required to open to us every time we want some bling. Equal in life. Equal in our need for respect. Equal in our humanity. And hopefully, equal in decency.

I disagree that men and women are equal. We arent. We are different, and equal means without difference. Hoever I do think we all need to treat each other with respect.

reply posted on 11-5-2008 @ 12:16 AM by Shazam The Unbowed

Originally posted by orangetom1999

Shazam,

about hunting...

These guys are quite femminine. All of them no...but the numbers of them like this are increasing rapidly.

Like roaches they breed. Like roaches. I see where you are coming from. And yeah. My next door neighbors wife mows the lawn.

I too never said that women were lesser..I said that this system treats men as lesser...mostly through a mans ignorance about everything including his manhood...ie maleness.

Its not ignorance. Ingornace is at least innocent. Its Indoctirnation, its not that they dont know, its that what they've been taugh aint so.

I am also saying ...why would a woman ever have any desire to compete with men in physical tasks when they can get a man to do physical tasks for them as if it is a mans idea with which to begin. This is alot of female power....ie...girl stuff religion.
To many women out here ..getting a man to do it as if it was his idea is the same thing to them as if they did it themselves. They accomplished the goal of getting the task done....without risk. They got the male to run for the touchdown for them. That is alot of power Shazam.

It requies the mans complicity or ignorance is my point. Theres no doubt women have a greater social intellignece, none, however, men aren't apes either. The problem is most have been so indoctrinated with the core feminist beleifs, that they never even think about what they do.

You keep going on as if this is a level playing field and the male has alot to boast about. I dont think so. If a man has so much to boast about ..or strut..why the title of this thread??

As the title says, its a conspiracy.

As far as I am concerned ..what passes for manhood/maleness in this country is very overated. I find it the same for womanhood.

I guess Id have to ask what your perception of "what passes" is.

I also never said ..that men should accept a womans values or value system. That is in fact one of my pet peeves with alot of women...the attempt to substitute her value system for mine..while I am taking the risks for both systems.

Must have misunderstood then. yeah I agree.

I dont have a problem with making certain changes for a woman if she in fact offers certain value to me. I do have a problem if she offers ..."The appearance of value." in lieu of real value. These are two distinctively different things. They are not the same. Beauty and sexuality in a woman are not real lasting value to me. Also i dont have to take up with a woman to gain access to these.

Recirprocity is the heart of all great relationships.

Could be ..possible he wanted to do something nice. However...tonight this same guy told me his woman wanted him to take her to Pennsylvania to see her family...in the van. According to him...he told her ..not a problem ..if she pays for the gasoline. I shook his hand and congratulated him. Maybe there is hope for him yet grasshopper!! If he sticks to his guns...well..took him long enough.

Sounds right.

As to getting the van...I dont assume she manipulated him since I know he volunteered into at least half of the decision on his own. He bears as much of the responsibility as does she. I believe in equality here. But who once again is assuming the RISK??? Understand?? I dont believe that she is making the van payments. Do you??

I understand what you are saying. And yeah, in this case he is.

What is going to happen if she must assume the RISK for the gasoline for the trip?? Ive done this to several women ...amazing how quickly a idea or concept dies on the vine when thier is no "safety net " to fall into in case things dont work out.

I used to keep a # car just for first dates. It revealed character quickly.

Risk...Shazam...Risk....not tostesterone is what seperates many men from many women.

Testoserone levels relate directly to a mans willingness to accept risk. There was a recent study of floor traders on the NYSE that was able to correlate the level of risk traders would accept to the traders testosterone levels. The higher thier levels, the more money they made. T is what makes Males into Men. Any Attmepts to lower mens T levels, are attempts to make them less masculine.

LOL LOL LOL...this is about the only place. I submit to you that in places which seem to be male stores..like Lowes and Home depot..the men are purchasing products to earn moneys for their familys or taking directions from their women to make the home a better place. It is into the springtime now...going into summer. Watch all the men in Lowes and Home Depo

My point is, retailers act in a way designed to make the most money. If you sell clothes, you know women care more about clothes than men, on average. You know this, becasue women buy clothes more often, spend more on clothes, andhave larger wardrobes. Men spend thier money on different things, so the comparison of sqaure footage in retail clothing stores is not a valid measurement of economic power.

[edit on 5/11/2008 by Shazam The Unbowed]

reply posted on 11-5-2008 @ 12:18 AM by scarlett1125

As a self-proclaimed equality feminist (meaning that I believe that our differences should be celebrated and embraced, rather than being squashed), I see your point. As someone else has already said, I prefer a "manly man." I don't want a man who spends more time in front of the mirror than I do. However, the flip side of that is that I want to be appreciated for my strengths, just as men are appreciated for theirs. That means being paid the same as men in my field, but it also means that standards in jobs that require strength and agility should not have to lower standards to accommodate women who want the pay without doing the same amount of work. For instance, if my house is on fire, I do not want some 110 lb woman coming in to rescue me. We won't make it. If the standards have been lowered for her, then my life is at risk. I don't want to put my life or the lives of others at risk simply because some girl wanted to do a job for which she was not qualified.

That being said, I think that the problem that I see is that we all want to be respected, but we've forgotten that respect requires us to respect others, too. People who do not respect others or their qualities that are different but just as valuable are creating the problem. The remedy to this problem? Teach our children that women and men are different, but people should be judged on their own merits--not on their gender. Unfortunately, on both sides of the equation, the bad apples ruin it for the rest of us. When women stop asking for special privileges based on their gender and men stop putting women in a subservient role because of their physical differences, we might be on the right track.

Of course, I'm not idealistic enough to think that this is just going to happen over night. It might not ever happen. But it's my opinion that that is what needs to happen.

reply posted on 11-5-2008 @ 01:03 AM by Shazam The Unbowed

reply to post by scarlett1125

Well said, well spoken, and well thought out.

reply posted on 11-5-2008 @ 02:07 AM by caballero

reply to post by scarlett1125

very good, i agree with your stance its about respect not equality. When i was talking about this with my girlfriend i was telling her how i wanted equality for women but that men and woman should embrace their obvious differences, and that woman should stay out of a warzone, and she told me that that wasnt equality and she was right. So i dont agree with women being equal i do however agree with respecting women so that they have equal opportunities within their abilities.

What i mean within their ability i mean they should stay out of situations like fighting wars, crab fishing, lumber-jacking, construction, anything like that especially combat keep women out of combat. because woman are smaller and not as strong so all of those would be more difficult for women to handle.

reply posted on 11-5-2008 @ 09:08 AM by eye open doors

Sure. Ive met cynthia rothtock, Mouse Mallone, and Laila Ali. Everyone one of whom was a supremely well conditioned, and trained, woman. I asked everyone of them what they would do if attacked by a man with similar training.
"Surprise him with an attack and run like hell" was the consensus response

Life and death battle does not equate to simulated battle.

reply posted on 11-5-2008 @ 09:46 AM by whitewave

reply to post by eye open doors

Exactly. Men and women fight differently. Men will beat each other up and then buy each other a beer. Women will make a place in the tomato patch for your biodegrading corpse.

Darkelf is right in saying we don't want equality, we want respect. Just because I can't physically do a lot of things that males can do doesn't mean that the things I can do aren't valuable.

reply posted on 11-5-2008 @ 10:18 AM by whitewave

reply to post by Shazam The Unbowed

Twice I've come close to getting the crap kicked outa me and both times it was against women. Men are just strong; women are meeeeaan. I worked at a male prison once and almost all of the guards admitted they had started out at a womans prison because they thought it would be easier. They all confessed that women were much worse than the men, more unruly, more prone to violence, more manipulative, more everything that made their jobs difficult. As for you believing me, don't care.

You said "we are not equal. Difference doesn't equal equality." I submit that 2+2= 4 and that 1+3 also equals 4. Four is equal to four no matter how you arrived at it. I believe you missed my earlier point about equal in life, not in function.

If there's a conspiracy against manhood (and I believe there is), then it's up to the MEN to expose and correct that conspiracy. For one, quit eating soy products as they decrease your testosterone. Quit spending your spare time involved in matters of no importance. Read SunTzu's "The Art of War" and see how many of the tactics mentioned are being utilized right now. All these things are in place to distract you from your role, responsibilities and duty as MEN.

Your manhood is being usurped; not by women-we're just the scapegoats set up to take the fall for the usurpation, but by the powers that be. Divide and conquer seems to be the modus operandi. Blacks and whites against each other. Catholics and Protestants against each other. Muslims and Jews against each other. Men and women against each other. Young against old. Poor against rich.

Unless we all learn to respect each others differences and work together to save each other, we're ALL in big trouble. If you want to tackle THE conspiracy you need to ditch the tunnel vision and see the big picture.

reply posted on 11-5-2008 @ 10:37 AM by billybob

reply to post by scarlett1125

right on, sister.
i like the cut of your jib, and the vibe of your jibe.