Even on Fathers' Day, Media Find a Way to Bash Men

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

When you simply whine, you have already bought into this stereotype that is making you wet your pants. Wimps.

I'm sorry, why is it nessecary to express that kind of sentiment?

All you're doing is establishing a "I'm better than you" perspective on the discussion.

You can call them wimps if you like, but it's not as if whining about it is going to make them work harder.

reply to post by centurion1211


...so, near as I can make out, according to your avatar, your current mood is "I cultivate vines, I saw, I conquered".

Am I missing something? Or is that a pun on whine?

reply to post by Anti-Tyrant


I disagree. I think it's a 'tough love' tactic, and it makes sense. If people are complaining that the current perception of men in modern times is that of stupidity, laziness or inadequacy then all this thread is doing is changing the perception from one of inadequacy to one of over sensitivity and whining.

Is that any better?

In short, quit complaining, it's TV. If you don't want to be perceived individually as stupid, then don't be stupid. If you don't want to be perceived as lazy, then don't be lazy. If you don't want to be perceived as oversensitive, don't complain about what you think people think of you.

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
all this thread is doing is changing the perception from one of inadequacy to one of over sensitivity and whining.

Then perhaps we should do something about that perception, because if we don't then there's pretty much nothing we can do about it.

I suppose we could try being defiant to the prejudices of societal norms, as people who have tried numerous times in recent history have shown it works to a certain degree.

For now, we need to understand the origins of this problem, it's sad that we're all focusing on finding a solution without a clear understanding of the causes of how this came to be in the first place.

If you want my thoughts on that matter, i think that the process was sped up rapidly when the woman's magazines started blathering about "New Age Men", The men who "Do the house-keeping and spend time with the kids", thereby serving to create the stereotype of a recessive male in the household within the minds of those seeking to bring about societal change.

The MSM got good at understanding how we think...

Originally posted by Anti-Tyrant You can call them wimps if you like, but it's not as if whining about it is going to make them work harder.

ok, point taken.

reply to post by Rasobasi420


A real man stands up for himself when he is attacked.

White males have a right to stand up for themselves, and your emotional attack telling us to stop whining only shows that you are an emotional child.

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by Rasobasi420

 

A real man stands up for himself when he is attacked.

I guess we have different interpretations of what being a man means.

I always thought it meant knowing when to hold 'em, and knowing when to fold 'em. Knowing when to walk away, and knowing when to run.

a friend was stuck watching lifetime with his better half on fathers day. their tribute to fathers day: a day full of movies featuring dean caine kicking the crap out of one woman or another (ok, so they have more than dean caine...but you gotta admit he is in a lot of c rate lifetime movies).

reply to post by Rasobasi420


Well, if your definition of a man comes from a cliched pop song, then you don't have a clue.

White men have been standing by as the racial stereotypes have piled up, while all the non-white-males have upped the political correctness anti, claiming victimhood off every twisted turn of phrase or observation. Now white males are finally stepping up and saying, we want the same treatment in the media as everyone else.

You also have to know when to call, and when to raise.

OK. I will challenge you. Make a list of these media dolts you're describing, and I'll match it with a revered white man in history or contemporary culture.

Simple face to face.

reply to post by Rasobasi420


I'll name white male pop media dolts from the last ten years, and you name white male pop media positive role models from the last ten years. This would be a contest where we choose from the same pool. My complaint essential deals with the media's portrayal of white males over the last decade. We can then reverse roles and I'll take white female role models verses your white female dolts from pop media in the past ten years.

I'll start off with Homer Simpson and the entire Simpson's white male cast.

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
I guess we have different interpretations of what being a man means.

I always thought it meant knowing when to hold 'em, and knowing when to fold 'em. Knowing when to walk away, and knowing when to run.

Being a "real" man is impossible, because the definition changes everywhere. I would say that there are two basic tenets, however, that are what i judge a man by:

1. does he hold himself to a greater account than others will hold him. In other words, is he self driven and able to act independantly, with conscience given to making good decisions, and then owning the failures created from those decisions. Examples of common failures to live up to this: a. not taking care of your children b. infidelity c. finger pointing d. excuse making (either you succeed or fail...no one wants excuses, they want results)

2. be a positive impact on the world around you. Common failures include: a. laziness. if you don't go to work everyday, then you are certainly not a man (students and infirm excluded). b. being disrespectful or disdainful to ANYONE (you must treat everyone respectfully. not doing so is childish) c. high amounts of debt. live within your means and pay your bills

of course it isn't exhaustive. but let me tell you: the use of violence, even in self defense, is a poor definition of a man. That is no way to judge anything other than an animal, even if it is common among men. as well, knowing how to play poker has nothing to do with being a man, unless you are wyatt earp. you guys lack substance. this isn't the wild west, and such measures of men went out with the industrial revolution.

Originally posted by poet1b

I'll start off with Homer Simpson and the entire Simpson's white male cast.

Lol Everyone in the Simpsons is portrayed as lacking in some way. Some in brains, some in coolness, some in looks, some in moral fiber. Black and white, male and female.

I can't believe you're using the Simpsons as an example of white male oppression.

But if we're going that route, let me say, The entire White male cast of the Justice League.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


"you guys lack substance."

Exactly which guys are you talking about?

In this world, there are times when a person has to stand up and defend themselves and their loved ones and their way of life. This is a reality of this predatory world. If you don't grasp this, it's probably because you have never had to fight for anything in your life, especially for your survival. This is the problem with many who live in first world nations, they have lost their connection to the struggle for survival that is very real, except it doesn't seem that way in the very insulated realm of life in first world nations.

Real men are not sheep.

reply to post by Rasobasi420


Sorry, but most of the women in the Simpson's are portrayed as reasonable, intelligent, caring people. The men who are minorities are usually the ones who provide a voice of reason to the white males who bumble their way through each episode.

The Justice League, men in tights wearing capes and masks? That isn't a good example of a white male role models. Is that the best you can do?

reply to post by poet1b


i don't wish to argue. however, i will once again point out that the use of violence is not a mesure of a man, no matter the capacity for which it is used.

I can provide you countless examples (think "Hawking", who is a giant amongst men, but could not defend himself in any capacity). the two examples i saw on this page were: ability to defend and ability to play poker. Neither showed the substance of what creates a good, solid, worthwhile man.

I have tried to interject something of more substance. something that provides more real measurements of what men should strive to be. Yes, i know that defense is a mans responsibility. but some are not made for that, so they have other roles. but they are not less of a man than the ones fighting. otherwise, there are a lot of men on this forum who should be at war right now. possibly yourself included.


no, i rarely have had to fight. i was an all state offensive lineman here in texas in high school. played college ball, too (we lost a national championship by a single dropped pass). not many wanted to tangle with me, based on my looks and physical ability. but i also live at the crossroads of the mexico-texas drug trade, and have had to defend myself more than once in my life. i also run a call center for a fortune 500 company, swimming in a shallow pond with lots of sharks. i am familiar with "fighting". Please don't be presumptive.



[edit on 18-6-2008 by bigfatfurrytexan]

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by Rasobasi420

 

Sorry, but most of the women in the Simpson's are portrayed as reasonable, intelligent, caring people. The men who are minorities are usually the ones who provide a voice of reason to the white males who bumble their way through each episode.

Minorities like who? Drederick Tatum? Lucius Sweet? Bumble Bee Man? Lilly Kwon? Dr. Nick Riviera?

The Justice League, men in tights wearing capes and masks? That isn't a good example of a white male role models. Is that the best you can do?

Yeah, who wants a child to grow up thinking that truth, justice and the American way to be a way of life.

We could go back and forth all day, but the fact is that there are always going to be comedic dolts in the media. Chances are, they're gonna be white. And chances are, they're gonna be male. That's just the numbers talking

[edit on 18-6-2008 by Rasobasi420]

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


The Gambler's song isn't about playing poker, it's about living life. Knowing which battles to fight, and which ones should be avoided. And never measuring your worth against others until the game is done. It's actually very deep, and very appropriate.

There is a concept out here called Magick...Sometimes called Occult..meaning concealed..hidden. Magick often works by the power of suggestion. This is obvious by the commerical appeal in the media..especially in food commercials. If you are suggested enough times you will change your conduct...to where someone else controls you ..what you purchases or what and how you think. Your values if you like. Often how this is done is hidden from you and your children. Even your Women.

I dont know if some of you fully understand that this type of suggestion and control over us can be a DRUG. Television and media..movies can be a very powerful and influential DRUG and like many DRUGS they can alter our perception of reality. Especially on young persons...those without any real hard life experiences or knowleges.

The very intresting thing about a medium like television is that many people do not know or are not aware that their perception of reality has been altered ..by a drug. Someone or something has reached down into thier soul and grabbed them and substituted thier thinking, beliefs, and values with other thinking, beliefs. and values.
This is very easy to do on those not schooled in the thinking or techniques.

What this type of programming does and is intended to do is alter the percception of many unwary people as to how the reality stacks up out here.
It has the ability to change the authority structure as well as the RISK structure. It has the ability to reinforce the belief that some people are more expendable and disposable than others. Certain values in people are more expendable and disposable than in others.

One fingerprint I have taken care to notice among many of my coworkers is the unusual habit many of them have of describing a concept or belief in terms of referencing some movie or television program they have viewed. When first I began to notice this ...and then have it repeated ..over and over among different peoples, I was astonished at what I was seeing. These people have few real life experiences...they must reference second hand experiences through television and movies to illustrate a point. What do you think it will be like with the next generation?? I dont actually believe many of these people are even aware that they are doing this. They think it is entirely normal.
Have many of you noticed this among peoples you know?

Are we getting so pitiful as a people that we must live secondhand vicarious lives through what we experience on the boob tube rather than real life experiences??

Any of you people ever think about turning the machine off more often and restrict more of what is watched?
To me there gets to be less and less of any value on the boob tube now days. When the commercial appeal is more original than the regular programming...that is a wake up call.

By the way....I occasionally buy Cosmopolitan or Redbook or Elle magazines and take the quizzes to see what kind of drivel they are feeing the women this year. Not much changes in the appeal.
However...I must also tell you that Maxim, GQ, and others of this genre are no better. They are the male Cosmopolitan. Same plot line...think this way ...buy this or be a nobody. It is all outside fluff. Not much food for the inside. Buy this product ..imagine you are a star and you will be.

Oh..another line of thinking about television being a drug...ever watch people raised on a steady diet of television drugs...a regular daily feeding for most of their lives? Ever see what happens to them when you take them off the drug ..cold turkey?? They cannot deal with it. They go into withdrawls. BEcome agitated. All the effects of being taken off a drug cold turkey. It is pitiful to watch. They are not even aware of it. Put them back in front of a boob tube..and they calm down. Pitiful ..really pitiful.

Oh..and Howmuchisthedoggie posted on page 3 that the programmng and merchandizing is about money...dead on ..in the X ring. Also correct in their posting that women control the purse strings in this country. I have posted this myself many times. The men only take risks for the moneys. They do not actually make as many decisions in how the moneys are spent. Merchandizers know that they must primarily sell the woman...to get the moneys earned by the male. If the woman also works they have access to two sources of moneys. Translate this that they must promote the womans consumption levels at the expense of the Males RISK in earning it. To get to the woman they must also get to the kids in order to get to more of the moneys earned by the Male.
Translate this again that the male must come in second place or more down the pecking order to support all this merchandizing...cash flow.
A very large television drug habit must be sustained and cultivated here on a unawares public...especially those who are able to consume more goodies.
By the way...consumption levels=economics=politics. This means that this fingerprint being described by Grady Phillpot translates over to the field of politics in also cultivating votes. Particularly the female and votes of the very young. They all have the emotional fingerprint susceptible to such seduction techniques.
Remmeber also that politics pays for public education ..meaning this is how much of this stuff also gets into public schools.

This is a bit disconnected but I hope some of you can follow the fingerprint and begin connecting the dots. I merely offer some of you a variety of dots here to connect.

Thanks to all for thier posts,
Orangetom

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


I never claimed that violence is a measure of a man, I pointed out that defending oneself against accusations are characteristics of a man. What gives you the idea that my definition of what makes a man is so narrow? I'm sure Hawking could defend himself intellectually quite well, and that is very important in our modern world. Intellect dominates the physical. It is intellect that has put man on top of the apex on our planet.

It sounds like you do grasp my point that strong men defend themselves, but for some reason you want to assume this is my complete summary of what makes a man, and claim that I lack substance. Maybe you should not have made this assumption about me in the first place.

I reserve the right to defend myself, and people who call me a whiner for doing such are the ones out of line.