It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

New World Order and Turning Men Into Girls.

page: 8
9
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 03:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by ISHAMAGI
Women fight dirtier, that is why a strong woman always wins! Women will bomb your Facebook, slash your tires, get someone to snip you up, call your work, call you any and all of the most hurtful and derogatory things about you and you friends and family, IN FRONT OF your friends and family!


You are right that women are dirtier fighters, and that they're more manipulative and conniving, but none of that above behaviour sounds ''strong'' to me.
It just sounds weak, needy and psychotic.




posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 03:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Sherlock Holmes
 





The ''uber-macho tactics'' ( as you put it ), are not done to impress anyone, but they are the best option for both the man and the woman.


Machismo would be a compliment. en.wikipedia.org...

Machismo is prominently exhibited or excessive masculinity. As an attitude, machismo ranges from a personal sense of virility to a more extreme male chauvinism.


The trait may be seen as the product of runaway evolution, as Frits Staal notes, The peacock's tail, the enlarged claw of the male fiddler crab and the machismo of members of the human species are all exaggerated features that may cause injury to individuals that display them but attract females.


Crude, primitive, base, backward, brutal, vulgar all seem a better fit. Abandonment of intelligentsia and sentience because they seem like "gay" attributes? Insane.

www.themachoparadox.com...


[edit on 9-8-2010 by rusethorcain]



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 03:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes

Originally posted by ~Vixen~
Not the PC answer, but accurate nonetheless. Add one more vote for a "d-bag" rating from me. You can try to impress some women with these misguided uber-macho antics, but I assure you that some of us would just walk away and let you enjoy the two meals you ordered by yourself.


Well, you must be either paying lip-service to the ''pc'' lines, or one of those 1 in 10 women that are happy with a wimpy, indecisive man.

The ''uber-macho tactics'' ( as you put it ), are not done to impress anyone, but they are the best option for both the man and the woman.

In fairness, if a woman did walk away because she can't handle it, then she wouldn't even be worth bothering about, or wasting my time with, anyway.
No skin off my nose.

[edit on 9-8-2010 by Sherlock Holmes]


Women do not like wimpy men. Even if they claim this is the case, it is just an excuse. Look how many women are in toxic relationships and want more. There is a movie, 'I,psychopath' where a woman, despite the fact her partner admits he feels nothing toward her, she stays with him. Why? Because he is strong in her eyes and she loves it. Nuda veritas.



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 03:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by rusethorcain
Crude, primitive, base, backward, brutal, vulgar all seem a better fit. Abandonment of intelligentsia and sentience because they seem like "gay" attributes? Insane.


Or perhaps ''macho'' men don't want to try and be someone that they're not ?

It is perfectly easy to be a ''man's man'' while at the same time possessing intelligence, creativity, and using ''gay'' attributes appropriately and sparingly.



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 06:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes

Originally posted by 4nsicphd
And they probably learn how to spell, too.
Hint: If you're using a word as a contraction of two words, it has an apostrophe - one of these things "'". As in it's for it is. And the 3rd person possessive pronoun is "their." Or is the proper use of our language a "bad," "girly", "hormonal thing?


Don't be an arse.
How good is your Bulgarian spelling ?


My Bulgarian is not very good, but then I'm not trying to communicate in Bulgarian. My Macadonian isn't too shabby , though. Unfortunately, this computer doesn't have a Cyrillic or Glagolitic alphabet font, so either would be a problem.
I do think it a little ironic that a thread debating the intellectual prowess of females should feature submissions showcasing the language skills of a second-grader.



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 07:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by 4nsicphd
My Bulgarian is not very good, but then I'm not trying to communicate in Bulgarian.


So in other words you can't speak or write Bulgarian, yet you try and criticise a Bulgarian for not spelling perfectly in English. Fascinating.

There was no problem with communication, as you understood his points perfectly well, which was proven by you smarmily correcting his spelling and grammar.

If you didn't understand the communication, then you couldn't correct it, could you ?


Originally posted by 4nsicphd Macadonian isn't too shabby , though. Unfortunately, this computer doMyesn't have a Cyrillic or Glagolitic alphabet font, so either would be a problem.


You can change the settings on your keyboard to write in Cyrilic, or you could just transliterate it. Not too much of a problem.

Of course, I'm sure you can't really speak Macedonian, and you were just trying ( and failing ) to be clever.


Originally posted by 4nsicphd
I do think it a little ironic that a thread debating the intellectual prowess of females should feature submissions showcasing the language skills of a second-grader.


I don't see any irony at all, considering the poster was writing in a foreign language and alphabet.

If someone's speaking English as a second language, then I would consider it to be polite to give them some leeway.
Just as I'd hope people would do to me, if I was trying to converse with them in their language.

There are many foreign language speakers on this board that don't have perfect English, yet I don't see people pulling them up on their spelling, grammar or syntax.

The only reason you chose to, was because you were upset at the points that he was making.
You wouldn't have pulled him up on his spelling, if he'd been putting across a point that you were sympathetic towards.
Which just shows your true colours and intentions.

If truth be told, I think you didn't realise that the poster was speaking English as a second language, and now feel rather stupid at your rude outburst. But you've gone too far in to back down.


Also, how do you know that the poster isn't dyslexic ?
Do you normally consider people who have dyslexia as lacking ''intellectual prowess'' ? That really is pretty low.

[edit on 9-8-2010 by Sherlock Holmes]



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 08:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes

Originally posted by rusethorcain
Crude, primitive, base, backward, brutal, vulgar all seem a better fit. Abandonment of intelligentsia and sentience because they seem like "gay" attributes? Insane.


Or perhaps ''macho'' men don't want to try and be someone that they're not ?

It is perfectly easy to be a ''man's man'' while at the same time possessing intelligence, creativity, and using ''gay'' attributes appropriately and sparingly.


In my estimation "macho" is little more than a pathetic bid for attention and a clear indicator of a domineering and overbearing dad and a submissive, unappreciated mother.

A mans man does not need to hide behind this facade of false bravado and brute strength. I have seen "macho" men bawl like babies and brave women grit their teeth and walk into a fire.



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 08:52 AM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 08:55 AM
link   
jesus was killed because he worked on the sabbath- you know.....he raised lazarus from the dead. highly satanic and obviously god had a plan already that the little boy screwed with......satan?


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 09:20 AM
link   
Wow,.. this thread is no longer any resemblance of the topic,.
Hello Mods
Where is a cop when You need em



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by xxshadowfaxx
Women are not weak. When a woman is mad, she can be a very worth opponent. Women just have a different way of doing things than men do. Men may be physically stronger, but women have more brains, and that is a fact. I think people underestimate women to much, including the women themselves.


Amen. And as far as "cowardly natures" just ask any Cop, if you have to break up a fight between two men or two women, which would you rather have to do? They pick the guys anytime.

Not disparaging the OP, whom I believe was debunking this "feminizing theory" horse-pucky, but this is darned near the single dumbest thing I've heard on here in two weeks.

Things like this "theory" show that SOME conspiracy theorists ARE wacked in the head, which makes the more deliberate and methodical look bad and lose credibility too.

If anything, crazy "theories" like this are tools to discredit and make laughable all people seeking the truth about this or that; so who would benefit from doing that, hmmm?

The real bad guys, people who benefit from keeping us in the dark.



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 12:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lil Drummerboy
Wow,.. this thread is no longer any resemblance of the topic,.
Hello Mods
Where is a cop when You need em


I second that.



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 02:09 PM
link   
After all is said and done I think the OP might actually have something here. I think the roles of men and women are harmonized nicely in this film. Wonder if anyone remembers it? One of my favorite movies...

You have to listen to this Harmonica Bit - Very Masculine, Eerie


The very uplifting haunting, feminine

Charles Bronson

Claudia Cardinal

Henry Fonda


To me, Charles Bronson in this film is the epitome of a man's man and like the Unicorn perhaps never existed. Claudia Cardinal is the epitome of a woman.
Somehow I don't find the roles sexist yet they are stereotypical, man-hero, womanly woman, despicable villain.
And no, you don't find this kind of man around anymore.



[edit on 9-8-2010 by rusethorcain]



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 04:14 PM
link   
"another layer of manipulation" couldnt have put it better myself
but i do believe that some people are born in the wrong body.
tomboys?



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 04:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by catwhoknows
reply to post by vaevictis
 


Utter crap - haven't you heard of Boadicea - or Bodicca or whatever her name was.

She was head of a British tribe and fought the Romans (men) to the death.

If you think women are weak, good luck to you!
I think he was merely saying that 'in general' women are weaker than men and that is undeniable.



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 04:51 PM
link   
reply to post by vaevictis
 


I recall Alex Jones telling of how it was common practice for slave owners to threaten to punish a family if the man didn't do as he was told. The women would be quick to scold her man for angering the boss man and putting her children or family at risk. If this is true then I'm sure the govt. knows of this psychology and is trying to make men more submissive, like women generally are or have been throughout history. It has always been the part of the man to be the go getter, the bread winner, the dominant figure, the fighter. I can see how making men submissive would relax any governments fears of any retalliation for any of it's actions. So what's a nation of men with guns if they're scared to fight? A perfect plan on thier part, indeed. Now the question is, do we go quietly and repeat history like the jews in the showers or do we take our nuts back and fight? No disrespect toward any jewish people intended, sorry if it comes across like that.



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 04:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by catwhoknows
reply to post by Stillalive
 


So...you will get the girl hormones....OMG!! A fate worse than death!!!

Guess what - it is women who will save the world.
So are we to believe you are a profit? If not where is your proof that women will save the world? You have lost all credit.



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 05:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by keldas
The feminization of society may mean less wars.
This isn't just happening here in the states, it's worldwide. It's like the new 'liberal bible' for all of mankind. If a one world government comes into power, we had better hope we still have the balls to fight because we will be enslaved if we don't. Why would any man want to have to behave like a woman anyway? What the hell is wrong with people? it's all this media bs that's being taught to adults and kids in school. It's NWO bs! No wonder our government doesn't like christians, they wont go along with thier nazi bs.



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 10:44 PM
link   
I have a empire seed called HAND if anyone wants information postal mail me at


SENNIN DEKATOR
685 Sanderling Dr.
Indialantic , FL, 32903



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 11:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by oniongrass
Besides the chemical, there are also the legal and social aspects.

Legally, women are consistently given advantages by affirmative action. Boy I would like just once to have some of that!

Socially, boys in school esp. young boys are required to behave like girls or they get in trouble. And the trouble escalates if they don't change right quick. This is not friendly, it is out to hurt them permanently. It's serious business.


Please elaborate more on what type of behavior modification is enforced that forces boys to act like girls. I don't recall see that type of thing when my kids were in school, and they grew up to be perfectly "manly." (youngest son is a mechanical engineer and my older son is a military officer)


Originally posted by oniongrass
Another aspect is that we measure school success in female terms. For example in deciding who gets into "gifted and talented" education, to get into gifted verbal classes one must do well on verbal tests. To get into gifted math classes one must do well on both verbal and math tests. That leave out boys who are only gifted mathematically. They are excluded, not given a label of excellence, because they lack the verbal skill that is more typical of girls.


Are you saying, then, that since some boys may be less proficient than girls in verbal tests, the system should be changed to accommodate their deficiencies? We should change the rules to allow them to wear "the label of excellence" regardless of whether they meet all of the qualifying criteria? I disagree. Personally I think that todays academic standards are a joke, and should be made stricter. We don't need a generation where everyone is a "winner," we need a generation of truly exceptional talent that puts aside long outdated social stereotypes and rewards those who work to excel.


Originally posted by oniongrass
The only conclusion from this is that the system is designed to hurt boys in ways that will damage their prospects in the long term, and give girls relative advantages of the same type. I'm sure it succeeds.


Rather than assign academic handicaps based on gender, why not take the logical step of discarding all prejudices, preferences and stereotypes and reward kids based on their achievements?


Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes
Well, you must be either paying lip-service to the ''pc'' lines, or one of those 1 in 10 women that are happy with a wimpy, indecisive man.


I like a strong man as much as any other girl, however the impasse you and I seem to face is in what we find to be acceptable social behavior. A man doesn't have to deprive me of my ability to make my own decisions in order to prove his manliness. Treating me in a respectful manner and acknowledging me as a equal person goes a lot farther to earn my love and respect. Call it weakness if you wish, but I'd sooner go out with a compassionate gentleman than a self centered, know it all hunk.


Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes
The ''uber-macho tactics'' ( as you put it ), are not done to impress anyone, but they are the best option for both the man and the woman.

So by your reasoning, I should seek the advice and guidance of a man on everything I do? I had a really cool intern working with me today. Maybe rather than mentor him, I should have asked him for guidance because surely the MD in my title must stand for "Mis Directed" woman.


Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes
In fairness, if a woman did walk away because she can't handle it, then she wouldn't even be worth bothering about, or wasting my time with, anyway.
No skin off my nose.

It's not about our ability to "handle it," but rather about our willingness to "put up with it." There's a distinct difference between the two.




top topics



 
9
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join