Why is there a general discontent towards women?

page: 1
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 8 2008 @ 04:03 PM
link   
Im not sure if this is the place for this so bear with me here. Is it me or is there a general sense of discontent all of a sudden being felt universally among men towards how women lead their social life. almost all my friends keep reminding me of how women have become 'whores' and irresponsible when it comes to their sex lives; and that they run a hedonistic/utilitarian lifestyle that is ruining society as a whole. and everywhere i look on the internet you see people blaming women for STDS, and look down on them for living a social life or displaying a certain sexual attitude that was only acceptable for men. even on ATS like hereand here
as i recall this wasnt an issue like 10 yrs ago, so this leads me to think that has feminism backfired? or are people starting to rally behind conservatism. so why cant US be like europe anyway, as US is sort of in the middle which is hard to figure out.
what caught my attention was this ad posted in another forum:


which i think is disparaging and demeaning btw, u probably seen it before though, however this one i thought was funny:



so any thoughts...am i the only one sensing this because i swear i heard the word 'whore' today more than 10 times.




posted on May, 8 2008 @ 05:11 PM
link   
The poster contradicts the people who created it.

I understand the degradation they are trying to cause. They say homosexuals cause HIV when in fact it is the sexual act of anal which causes HIV. And is it just homosexuals who partake in anal? No.

The person who created that poster must have really bad Herpes that could have been avoided by not having sex with a hooker.

I Just ignore ignorant B/S. Woman created man. They are superior. End of story.

[edit on 8/5/2008 by xion329alpha]

[edit on 8/5/2008 by xion329alpha]



posted on May, 8 2008 @ 05:25 PM
link   
reply to post by xion329alpha
 


Ah how sincere of you...dude, were you trying to be funny? Im not a chick! and I didnt mention homosexuals. I was asking why this difference in gender roles exist no matter what and the stigma attached to it. again, im a guy 100%+ more. see look i like violence
because im guy.



posted on May, 8 2008 @ 06:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by xion329alpha
I Just ignore ignorant B/S. Woman created man. They are superior. End of story.


I thought that was supposed to be God
---and lets not get into the chicken or the egg debate



posted on May, 8 2008 @ 06:51 PM
link   
These are strange times for sure.

Women have unprecedented sexual freedom these days, and while you would think men would be like "wow, a whole generation of sexually liberated females, weeeee!!!", in practice it doesn't always work out that way.

Like when you take your would-be gf/wife out for a night on the town, and she starts flirting with other men right in front of your face and publicly humiliating you.....

Of course in some unenlightened countries it would be considered traditional, socially acceptable and even prudent to take her home and beat her half to death for such an insult - but of course, in western culture a man would be considered scum of the earth for doing such a thing.


So these are very confusing times for men I think. Traditionally men have prided themselves on being "king of the castle" and being the provider for their families, but of course that's all but gone now. How are men supposed to feel when their women pretty much do whatever the hell they want whenever they want?



posted on May, 8 2008 @ 09:14 PM
link   
reply to post by DuneKnight
 


Hate to say it, but there have always been guys who think all women are whores because they have the audacity to turn him on, but not be all that interested in him. It's not new, and it has nothing to with the changes feminism has wraught, and has everything to do with certain types of guys who want to control the sexualities of women they're attracted to, and who think they're entitled to said women's interest.

[edit on 5/8/2008 by asilvahalo]



posted on May, 8 2008 @ 09:58 PM
link   
I see what you are talking about and have throughout my teen years to now being an almost 30 yr old woman. And boy is it scary!
It's what pretty much kept me in line and from going the hookerish route as so many women seem to be pursuing these days, thinking it's cool or something :shk:

So, from my own personal experience and opinion, I would dare say this discontent you speak of is felt not only among men but among women of fellow women also. And it seems to get worse by the minute.

The "classy" lady is certainly an endangered species and it doesn't seem like many people are all that concerned




[edit on 8-5-2008 by ImJaded]



posted on May, 9 2008 @ 02:38 AM
link   
reply to post by asilvahalo
 


You are right, it does have to do with control.

Look at it this way - if you were a man with a wife and children and you were to find out that your wife had actually gotten pregnant by another man and you were raising a child that wasn't even your own, wouldn't you be outraged?

And studies show that this is true for about 10% of men with children! 10% of men with children are actually raising a child that isn't their own!


So this is something very primal for men and men take it very seriously, which is why, historically we've seen women being stoned to death and stuff like that for infidelity.

Men want women to be crazy wild sex nymphs with them, but with no other man - OR ELSE!!!


So this whole contemporary thing with women being sexually liberated and having unprecedented sexual freedom, where men are supposed to be OK with women being slutty and having sex with as many men as they want - it actually takes a LOT of adjusting for men.

We seem to be ending up with a whole generation of kids being raised by single moms and everyone screwing everyone. Is it good, is it healthy, is it good for the children.....? Who knows?



posted on May, 9 2008 @ 02:48 AM
link   
you know the difference between a hooker and a slut?

a hooker has the dignity + self worth to charge the going rate.
a slut just gives freely to anyone and therefore has no dignity or self worth.


my view is that the same applies to guys who think its cool to bang as many chicks as they can.



posted on May, 9 2008 @ 04:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Obliv_au
you know the difference between a hooker and a slut?
a hooker has the dignity + self worth to charge the going rate.
a slut just gives freely to anyone and therefore has no dignity or self worth.


you know what, a prostitute told me the same thing once not too long ago. she said something along the same lines as that she has the good sense to get paid for it. which gets me thinking; hookers throughout history, were they stigmatized for selling their bodies or for sleeping with alot of men? Im asking that because if their is a 'man-hooker' he wont be stigmatized.

btw, I talked to that hooker on the internet through coincidence. just in case :shk:

[edit on 9-5-2008 by DuneKnight]



posted on May, 9 2008 @ 04:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by MrdDstrbr
reply to post by asilvahalo
 

And studies show that this is true for about 10% of men with children! 10% of men with children are actually raising a child that isn't their own!


wow i dont believe it, 10% really, that should be made into a horror movie. My concern is raised by facts like these that their are consequences, big ones that come from women being irresponsible with their newly gained 'liberty' I know a society like that can backfire and return itself to conservative norms.

and an objection that i personally have towards the situation is that women would withhold sex when confronted with a serious relationship, but with someone she doesnt care about would sleep with him in a heartbeat (ONS). wheres the logic in that?



posted on May, 10 2008 @ 01:59 AM
link   
reply to post by DuneKnight
 


You dont understand this concept Dune Knight ??


and an objection that i personally have towards the situation is that women would withhold sex when confronted with a serious relationship, but with someone she doesnt care about would sleep with him in a heartbeat (ONS). wheres the logic in that?


I reckon I need to explain this to you as carefully as I know how.

Its about RISK. It is RISK MANAGEMENT.

With a guy she is intrested in ...a serious relationship...she must mainitain careful appearences ..not to be to loose or give it away to easily. This because of the goal to which she really wants access in this instance. The male and his potential. His earning potential and all that this implys.

With the guy in whom she is not all that intrested for such potential..the only potential is sexual potential. She is much more free to be her natural free sexual self...where no one else can see it or measure it. She has no future earning potential at risk here..hence much more free in the sexual department.

When women percieve they have little RISK with a male..they will do and tell him many things they would consider extremely vulnurable/risky in telling their husbands or boyfriends.

Most women are not wont to advertise this concept to the world but I can vouch for its authenticity.

You need to know and be very familiar with this principle for your future among the wildlife out here. Remember this and all that it implys.

Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on May, 10 2008 @ 06:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by orangetom1999
reply to post by DuneKnight
 

With the guy in whom she is not all that intrested for such potential..the only potential is sexual potential. She is much more free to be her natural free sexual self...where no one else can see it or measure it. She has no future earning potential at risk here..hence much more free in the sexual department.
When women percieve they have little RISK with a male..they will do and tell him many things they would consider extremely vulnurable/risky in telling their husbands or boyfriends.


sorry, orangetom1999 I know how hard you tried explaining this to me so forgive my stupidity in that field. its just the concept seems strange to me probably because i never thought about it before and thats not how i operate. Also i dont get this I thought that sexual intimacy/openness is only shared by loved ones or people who care about each other where they feel comfortable in that relationship, so how can risk management be a factor here; its supposed to be a 'secure' relationship. wont RISK be applied to people you dont know.



posted on May, 10 2008 @ 06:07 AM
link   
reply to post by DuneKnight
 


Firstly, that herpes advert is so deeply offensive I can't describe how it makes me feel. I'm amazed that it was allowed, and fairly certain that if it were in England the ASA would have banned it.

Secondly - I'm only 22, so a touch unsure on how things were ten years ago, but attitudes towards women are something that my (male and female) friends frequently discuss. The prevailing opinion among the men I know is that, although one might like to sleep with a slutty girl, there is no point in pursuing a long-term relationship with one, for two reasons: a) you'd never be able to trust her [idiotic, I know] b) concern that, as a man, you would not be able to "satisfy her" adequately, reinforcing the issue of trust.

Traditionally, women were expected to remain chaste until marriage, due to property being passed along patriarchal lines, i.e. with a cuckoo in the nest your wealth would be removed from your genetic off-spring. This is true of all patriarchal cultures, and has been for thousands of years; thus it is ingrained into the psyche, reinforced by everything we see around us.

It's not pretty, but it is the way things are. Mind you - I wouldn't want a man who'd slept around to much... A lack of discernment is not attractive, and reeks a little of desperation. These days, I think, sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.



posted on May, 10 2008 @ 06:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by PiratePiPi
reply to post by DuneKnight
 


Firstly, that herpes advert is so deeply offensive I can't describe how it makes me feel. I'm amazed that it was allowed, and fairly certain that if it were in England the ASA would have banned it...
...It's not pretty, but it is the way things are. Mind you - I wouldn't want a man who'd slept around to much... A lack of discernment is not attractive, and reeks a little of desperation. These days, I think, sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.


I'm sorry about the ad just wanted to get my point across, but you must know thats its probably fake, actually I'm pretty sure its fake, sexism in advertising is an extreme no no.
funny note: the ads i hate are the viagra ones because they make you feel that sex cant ever happen without viagra. its as though viagra created sex.

I beg to differ about the last comment you made, I think women arent that 'strict' as men are in that area of past relations, in fact women like a guy with experience; which is the main motivation for guys to sleep around so much. guys on the other hand claim to want experience but i dont think thats what they really want.



posted on May, 10 2008 @ 08:40 AM
link   
No need to apologize for the ad - I'm offended that someone would make such a thing, not that you'd post it
- and apparently gullible enough to think it might be real... I hadn't had my coffee at that point in the AM.

I haven't seen the Viagra ad - in the UK we don't have advertising for prescription medication... Not that we get a choice about what we take: only drugs passed by NICE are available on the NHS. The ads I really hate though are the ones that behave as if a man doing housework or childcare is a big deal, and something he should be praised for, rather than a normal thing. I can't remember the last time someone thanked me for hoovering.

The experience thing though... It's true most girls wouldn't want to sleep with a guy who wasn't sure which hole to put it in, but if a bloke constantly sleeps around it's not attractive either. There's a different between an experienced man, and a "something to prove" disease-ridden skank who's slept with all your friends and your sister. That goes for either sex.



posted on May, 10 2008 @ 11:13 AM
link   
I found this which i think is partially related to what we are talking about

FOXNEWS link

According to the study, which was conducted by a research agency backed by the government, French women have more than twice as many partners as they did in the 1970s. Even more shocking: One in five French men between the ages of 18 and 24 “has no interest in sex.” The study conducted 12,000 in-depth interviews with individuals of both sexes and a variety of ages.
Bottom line: women are becoming more like men.


and then there is a more comprehensive article about the same thing but it has lots of statistics that i don't understand or care about:
TIME

its always interesting to know what the french are up to. no not really.



posted on May, 10 2008 @ 01:23 PM
link   

sorry, orangetom1999 I know how hard you tried explaining this to me so forgive my stupidity in that field. its just the concept seems strange to me probably because i never thought about it before and thats not how i operate. Also i dont get this I thought that sexual intimacy/openness is only shared by loved ones or people who care about each other where they feel comfortable in that relationship, so how can risk management be a factor here; its supposed to be a 'secure' relationship. wont RISK be applied to people you dont know.


Hey ..DuneKnight..no problem here with me. I sort of thought you might have problems accepting the explaination. I hope I can enlighten you further. You are not stupid here.

Yes..the concept seems strange...no question about it. It was strange to me too until I began to change how I thought or in this case....did not think ...about women. Once I found out clearly that I gave women as a whole to much credit for certain character traits...many things began to clear up.

Your first mistake in assumption is this...


Also i dont get this I thought that sexual intimacy/openness is only shared by loved ones or people who care about each other where they feel comfortable in that relationship, so how can risk management be a factor here; its supposed to be a 'secure' relationship. wont RISK be applied to people you dont know.


While this is a valid assumption for individuals...it is not valid for a whole group. I can clearly tell you that in the case of women......when woman decides to mess around...she can be much more smooth and subtle about it than can be a man. In fact ..it is usually another women who begins to undestand that a woman is messing around..not a man.

Watch the stereotype out here...so prevalent. If all these men are out here fooling around....on thier women...with whom are they fooling around.
This kind of shoots holes in the concept that mostly men fool around?
I live very close to several military bases...what do you think happens when the men get deployed...especially the Navy Bases??? You wont see that on the evening news...yet the stories are legend around here.

My point here is that women can be very very subtle...smooth. Do not assume your templates of honor and fidelity hold. Hence your difficulty in understanding many multi dimensional concepts.

My point again is that a woman can fool around much more easily and conveniently with a man in whom she has little at risk...as long as no one sees it.

With a man in whom she has alot at stake..ie...serious risk/potential....she will tend to be more reserved. She must keep up certain appearances here.

As I said..another woman is more likely to spot this happening than a man. And women usually dont tell men this kind of thinking...or educate men in this line...the men might start to think outside the blocks in which a woman needs a man to limit his thinking.
This is how many women control men...by a mans lack of thinking and understanding about the true nature of a thing ..especially a woman.

In short..DuneKnight...not many women are fooled by other women....dont you be either.

Learn the patterns and fingerprints of how women think, value and hence how they will act. Nobility, honor and chivalry are great attributes and eagerly sought after by many. Just dont be ignorant about many things in this world.

Hope this helps,
Orangetom


[edit on 10-5-2008 by orangetom1999]



posted on May, 10 2008 @ 01:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by orangetom1999
Its about RISK. It is RISK MANAGEMENT.

With a guy she is intrested in ...a serious relationship...she must mainitain careful appearences ..not to be to loose or give it away to easily. This because of the goal to which she really wants access in this instance. The male and his potential. His earning potential and all that this implys.

With the guy in whom she is not all that intrested for such potential..the only potential is sexual potential. She is much more free to be her natural free sexual self...where no one else can see it or measure it. She has no future earning potential at risk here..hence much more free in the sexual department.

When women percieve they have little RISK with a male..they will do and tell him many things they would consider extremely vulnurable/risky in telling their husbands or boyfriends.

Most women are not wont to advertise this concept to the world but I can vouch for its authenticity.


Yeah, you're the ONE woman in the world who's willing to spill the beans on this secret, eh?


It's a strange thing, that some women are willing to have crazy, irresponsible, dirty sex with almost complete strangers - but they won't do the same things with their bf/husband, or they reject the men who love and care about them the most. "We can't start having sex, it would ruin our friendship" etc etc.

It can't be explained away by elaborate theories about gold-digging or status-seeking, securing men with high earning-potential and all that. The only thing that can explain it is just sheer horniness. These women seem to just get crazy-horny, to the point where they'll do stupid crazy things that change their lives irrevocably....



posted on May, 10 2008 @ 01:49 PM
link   
Don't dismiss orangetom so quickly (although I don't subscribe to the gold-digger theory)......

Women are told from a young age that men think women who sleep with them right away are easy and will fall into bed with anyone. Therefore, if a girl really likes a guy and wants to have a future with him, she will tend to hold out so he doesn't think she's a slut that sleeps around.

If she doesn't care if she ever sees him again, she's free to get nasty at the first available moment.





new topics
top topics
 
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join