Lack of feminine characteristics...

reply to post by Yeah-Alright


I would say the world today is a topsy turvy thing with no clear definition of what exactly is feminine characteristics. Sure we all know that females have no penises and are able to carry babys, but the rest is just not on scope with how we think they should be, or worse we don't even have a premise that they should be one way or the other, but mostly everybody is confused on what they should be like or are like, but in a way it's always been like that.

The world of today is not the world of yesterday, there is no clear defined role on what exactly a female has to do, or be, and the same goes for males, add to that the social and economic markets, were some females want some things in there life's that were not to long before in the past frowned upon, or just plain didn't exist. And also the chemicals that are everywhere in our ecosystems, and not to mention the mind numbing things that are perpetrated in all that you see and read about, from MTV to the latest movie to hit the theaters, to what Paris Hilton or some real housewife of some city in a show are up to this week.

And you can plainly see that things are not as they used to be. In fact things aren't as they used to be, even back then when they used to be as they supposedly were. It's a confusing time to be in, for a lot of people, and for those that aren't at all confused. All i can say, your time will come, you all are just a little behind.

This makes me wonder if as compared to past, there is a degradation of basic female characteristics, what it would be like in the future.

I don't think there is a degradation of basic female characteristics, its more like # is moving faster then we can know or grasp, and certainty faster then our parents were used to, and it's never easy in any relationship, much less relationships that are not easily defined or endorsed by your local tube channels. And females, well they are females, and that really says it all. Or at least as much as saying boys will be boys says about boys.

But If you need somebody to be blamed though, just do what I do and blame the grays. "WTF.. you think to yourself, yes I can read your thoughts, and it is crazy" but hey somebody has to be blamed, and the grays are as good a scapegoat as anybody else, exempt maybe the NWO people. But I flipped a coin already and there were two sides to it, heads = grays get the blame, tails = NWO agenda gets the blame. And heads it was, as good an explanation as any.

Well this is from a female's perspective who is comparatively new to living in a western society, I would like to know what do the males think about it. Are they fine with the fact that the females are becoming more aggressive, egotistical, money-minded and less 'traditional' in a way or there are those out there who still value those gentle qualities that in my personal opinion are very much valuable?!

I think really that females have always been like that, only not as defined as they are about it today, or maybe they are just confused, because I sure as hell am pretty confused concerning some things they say or do, or maybe I just dont keep it on my mind at all times like they do, anyways whatever. Do I hate it...some times. Do I love it.....some times. So like in all things and relationships with anybody, it's a give or take thing, as in.... Some give.. Some take. And yes those gentle qualities that are in your personal opinion valuable, I would say an affirmative on that, after all not even those who like aggressive, egotistical, money-minded people, would like those things at all times, and every time, thats like asking for a headache indefinitely. Just you know not everybody would agree with you, as you can see from this thread, the opinions and what people like are all over the place, and what some like another dislikes, and vice versa.

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
...
The problem with arguments like this one is that many of the males who are hot to preserve "traditional" roles arent really interested in history, or the truth about primates in general. But its out there. And the picture isnt one of a generic "feminine" role. It is one is which there is a good deal of variation, and in which monogamy is superficial at best. How can you argue what is natural for us, when most of you havent even taken the time to do any research as to what that might actually be.

"Leave it to Beaver" is not a historical documentary.

Marriage is not just about monogamy, but about social structure and resource control. You sound more like you are defending polygamy rather then feminism though with that post.

reply to post by Yeah-Alright


Liberty, meaning the statue of Liberty was and is a form of idol worship, it does not matter if you are Christian, Muslim or Judaism, it is still idol worship. If you look at history you will see a turn right after the statue was put up, at the time divorce was somewhere around 6% but has grown to about 60%, women went from dressing like women to dressing like men, and the men have taken to dress and act like women, go back before that idol was put up and women considered having children was a blessing from God, but now they consider it a curse and kill their own baby's wile shouting we have a right to choose. It is not bad enough that we have done this to our selves, but now we want to spread this religion, “Liberty,” to the rest of the world, so they can be just as wicked as we are, so their women will dress up for their lovers at work just like ours do.
When the president went to attack Iraq he said we are here to bring them Liberty, and then said, “What women does not want Liberty,” he was indeed telling the truth.

Originally posted by Cuervo

Woah... I know a couple of dudes that would just love your version of paternal responsibility. How can you assume they do not want the father around? And, even if they didn't, the father has every opportunity to gain custody.

Every opportunity? Hardly. It is extremely rare and difficult for a father to gain custody. Even more rare is the day that a woman is ordered to pay child support to a man who has been awarded custody. And in cases where there is join custody? The woman is still awarded support funds.

I don't "assume" that they don't want the father around. I have seen it play out time and time again among friends, in my professional life, and even the research data support that. Moreover, all too often, a woman will use the criminal justice system to level false claims of violence and/or abuse in order to extricate a man from her life while maintaining economic control over him.

I also notice that more often than not, a man may have one child that he pays support for, to a woman who takes support money from three or four men. Why is it that men can realize that they can't afford a second child, but a woman can't figure that out for herself?

Originally posted by SpitBallWeaver
reply to post by Yeah-Alright

 

Liberty, meaning the statue of Liberty was and is a form of idol worship, it does not matter if you are Christian, Muslim or Judaism, it is still idol worship. If you look at history you will see a turn right after the statue was put up, at the time divorce was somewhere around 6% but has grown to about 60%, women went from dressing like women to dressing like men, and the men have taken to dress and act like women, go back before that idol was put up and women considered having children was a blessing from God, but now they consider it a curse and kill their own baby's wile shouting we have a right to choose. It is not bad enough that we have done this to our selves, but now we want to spread this religion, “Liberty,” to the rest of the world, so they can be just as wicked as we are, so their women will dress up for their lovers at work just like ours do.
When the president went to attack Iraq he said we are here to bring them Liberty, and then said, “What women does not want Liberty,” he was indeed telling the truth.

edit on 8-3-2011 by SpitBallWeaver because: (no reason given)

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander

The problem with arguments like this one is that many of the males who are hot to preserve "traditional" roles arent really interested in history, or the truth about primates in general.

For one I think taking us back to primates is a little arbitrary. We haven't even found a link between all the evolving species yet, so primate social science doesn't apply.

I never said or made references to leave it to beaver styled living (you must have interpreted it that way). I never said I had a problem with a wife running off to England to commit debauchery. But I assume the person quoted in that was not an average Joe of the day.

Shall we put a microscope on the Victorian era? Last time I checked, the only place you could find girls wearing corsets was at those dingy bars where girls wear black lipstick.

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by boncho
As for today, women are liberated and men are complete retards like they have always been. So when they knock one up they just move on to another because that marriage stuff is stupid.

Oh - believe me. Women being liberated has nothing to do with irresponsible men.

Forced marriage is wrong.

Why do laws not force paternal responsibility?

They do, it's called child support payments and alimony.

And there are many women that take advantage of the system, even when the Father's intent is to provide for his kids. I know one example where the woman refused giving over custody to keep the checks coming in, however, she treated the kids for what they were, money.

I will say there are many men too that are completely irresponsible and abandon the child, it happens on both sides. Solution?

Originally posted by StigShen

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
...
The problem with arguments like this one is that many of the males who are hot to preserve "traditional" roles arent really interested in history, or the truth about primates in general. But its out there. And the picture isnt one of a generic "feminine" role. It is one is which there is a good deal of variation, and in which monogamy is superficial at best. How can you argue what is natural for us, when most of you havent even taken the time to do any research as to what that might actually be.

"Leave it to Beaver" is not a historical documentary.

Marriage is not just about monogamy, but about social structure and resource control. You sound more like you are defending polygamy rather then feminism though with that post.

She is defending idiocy, because according to her we haven't evolved in the least since primates. I will admit that there are a lot of remaining animal traits hidden inside us but 5000 years of recorded history has taught us that we don't drink our own urine and fling fecal matter at each other anymore. (unless, metaphorically)

And somehow she picks up 'leave it to beaver' as my idea of women being feminine, which, if I remember, most of the women in that show looked like men anyways.

She fails to address the gold ole days when women slapped themselves in rib bending corsets just for our male pleasure. Now that is a time I could go back too. It just sucks that the woman would be spending hours a day to do simple tasks well us macho men ran the world, not leaving much time for hoo-ha when we get home.

>Insert feminist rant here<

Originally posted by StigShen

Originally posted by Cuervo

Woah... I know a couple of dudes that would just love your version of paternal responsibility. How can you assume they do not want the father around? And, even if they didn't, the father has every opportunity to gain custody.

Every opportunity? Hardly. It is extremely rare and difficult for a father to gain custody. Even more rare is the day that a woman is ordered to pay child support to a man who has been awarded custody. And in cases where there is join custody? The woman is still awarded support funds.

I don't "assume" that they don't want the father around. I have seen it play out time and time again among friends, in my professional life, and even the research data support that. Moreover, all too often, a woman will use the criminal justice system to level false claims of violence and/or abuse in order to extricate a man from her life while maintaining economic control over him.

I also notice that more often than not, a man may have one child that he pays support for, to a woman who takes support money from three or four men. Why is it that men can realize that they can't afford a second child, but a woman can't figure that out for herself?

I apologize, I did oversimplify it. I know it is biased towards the women in the very few cases the father actually wants to take custody but to make the sweeping generalization you did is also wrong. I know of just as many deadbeat dads as I know of child support moms. It's all unfair but both genders get screwed by it. Children out of wedlock (or, at least, some kind of family arrangement) is never optimal. Again, this is why the adoption process needs to be streamlined.

reply to post by boncho


Ah. A denier of evolution. I should have suspected in a thread like this there would be some of those.

What the rest of your post had to do with anything I dont know. Clearly you did not look at the linked material, and that basically just means that you, like a couple of he other guys in the thread, just want to do monologues on how you feel women should act, what femininity is, with really absolutely nothing to support your argument that the form of femininity you prefer IS actually natural, and not learned or culturally imposed.

So be my guest. The floor is yours. You can regale us with tales about what real femininity is, since your gender knows so much more about it than ours.

Maybe the fact that men have the inside scoop on what femininity is is the reason the most "feminine" creatures on the planet are men in drag. No one can out feminine a Queen.

reply to post by boncho


The solution for women to take the responsibility that came with their freedom to have an abortion. If you don't want a kid, can't afford a kid, if you aren't married, then don't have a kid. That is the woman's choice, not the man's. I can tell you this much, if there were a "pill" that men could take, welfare offices and abortion clinics would be relics in 20 years.

reply to post by Yeah-Alright

I find the gentle qualities in a female is more valuable than anything else that this egotistical and selfish world has to offer.
I like a woman that is smart and wise and also gentle, that is hard to find these days in women born in a western society.

Originally posted by Cuervo

I apologize, I did oversimplify it. I know it is biased towards the women in the very few cases the father actually wants to take custody but to make the sweeping generalization you did is also wrong. I know of just as many deadbeat dads as I know of child support moms. It's all unfair but both genders get screwed by it. Children out of wedlock (or, at least, some kind of family arrangement) is never optimal. Again, this is why the adoption process needs to be streamlined.

Oh, don't get me wrong, there are indeed plenty of deadbeat dads out there. I won't argue that at all. But how many of these deadbeat dads were actually married to the woman and then abandoned what very clearly is a sworn duty? How many of these men never promised to provide, or even had the means to provide for a child? How many men were consulted when it came time for the woman to make a choice about whether or not she was going to carry the pregnancy to term?

Why did the woman choose to have a child by a man that could not or would not provide?

Even all of those questions aside, I still know of very few deadbeat dads by comparison, The ratio is further increased to the credit of men, when you consider that one woman may have children by 3, 4, 5, 6 different men, all or most of which are making support payments and are NOT deadbeats.

Some people won't be happy until we're all acting the same, believing (or not believing) in the same thing, are the same color and all speak the same language.

I for one rejoice in our differences, it's what adds spice to life. As they say, opposites attract.

reply to post by Cuervo


I meant to comment about adoption. That is no solution. There are group homes filled with kids who need to be adopted. Now of course, I wish the process were streamlined, to make it easier for these kids to be adopted, But most of the unwanted children who are born wind up in the most horrible situations you can ever imagine. One of my girlfriends works at my city's children's shelter. Some of the things that have gone on there over the years are absolutely horrible. And children who have been adopted, or gone into foster care? Even worse so many times. Many of the children never even live to become adults and die in horrific ways. Others, grow up to become true monsters in their own right.

The answer is for women to step up and actually take responsibility for managing their own bodies. Can't afford a child? Don't have one. Don't believe in abortion? Don't get pregnant. Not comfortable with insisting that a man wear a condom? There are many many more birth control options for women than for men. Options that women should already be using anyway if they are not prepared to raise a child on their own, but still elect to have sex with a man they are not married to. Not comfortable using birth control devices or pharmaceuticals at all? Then don't have sex when you are ovulating.

EDIT to add:

I do apologize if my tone sounds cold. I do appreciate your civility there Cuervo.

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
reply to post by boncho

 

Ah. A denier of evolution. I should have suspected in a thread like this there would be some of those.

What the rest of your post had to do with anything I dont know. Clearly you did not look at the linked material, and that basically just means that you, like a couple of he other guys in the thread, just want to do monologues on how you feel women should act, what femininity is, with really absolutely nothing to support your argument that the form of femininity you prefer IS actually natural, and not learned or culturally imposed.

So be my guest. The floor is yours. You can regale us with tales about what real femininity is, since your gender knows so much more about it than ours.

Maybe the fact that men have the inside scoop on what femininity is is the reason the most "feminine" creatures on the planet are men in drag. No one can out feminine a Queen.

I am not a denier of evolution. By definition you are because you don't think we have evolved since primates. I merely stated we haven't found the missing link, meaning that we have not traced are genetic heritage to a specific group of primates. Meaning you lack any real insight because you don't know exactly what sub group we came from.

And I read the link, apparently the women back then were so insane that men started copulating with each other. See, guess we didn't need women after all, except to knock them up at least once, to keep the human race going and everything.

>insert additional feminists rants here<


*Note, I was actually open to a discussion on this issue, but as soon as people mention anything about women and their affect of society it becomes a bashing crusade for feminists. This is social engineering at its best. You don't even know your own history as women, or the types of things you have influenced over the years.

Instead, it's about ego and pride, and not letting the man get you down, well kudos to you, because you can work and pay taxes and live the miserable life that men have had. 'Hello alcoholism and hello crazy, slap it all on and give me a job that bleeds my soul. Because then I can tell people I am independent, and I dont need anyone.I can die a lonely death without being codependent on anyone and I never have to deal with my intimacy issues.'

Hell, we should all be asexual, forget reproducing, let the men suppress their hormones and be cowards with no voice or opinion and let women spew premenstrual rhetoric about how we dont respect them. That is a world that I want to live in.

>Insert feminist explosion here

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander


I don't think anyone here has really been trying to define what feminism is, or even what they think it should be. I think most of what has been said is about what feminism is NOT. Aggression, confrontation, solitude, narcissism, these are not feminine traits.

I think they want change in the world, they need to realise this begins at the place you live. Doing this they will realise. There's also a powerstruggle wherein a lot of events are possible.

Eleanor of Aquitaine


Eleanor was one of the wealthiest and most powerful women in Europe and the world during the High Middle Ages. Eleanor inherited the Duchy of Aquitaine and Poitiers after her father’s death when she was only 15. As a result, Eleanor became an independent ruler in her own right receiving the titles of Duchess of Aquitaine and Countess of Poitiers. Aquitaine was the largest and wealthiest province of France during the 12th century. Unlike many other monarchs and women of the Middle Ages, Eleanor and her family were very well educated. Eleanor is credited for having transformed Aquitaine into one of the largest intellectual and cultural centers in Medieval Western Europe.


Oh look, she managed all that without burning her bra on the steps of Universities. Go figure

Hathshepsut

Hatshepsut was one of the most powerful women in the ancient world. She was the fifth pharaoh of the Eighteenth Dynasty of Ancient Egypt and she ruled longer than any other woman in Egyptian history. Hatshepsut was married to her sickly half brother, Thutmose II, and the two of them began to co-rule after the death of their father, Thutmose I, in 1492 BC In 1479 BC, Thutmose II died and Hatshepsut continued to rule by herself until her own death in 1458 BC

She must of had a women's lib movement to free her from oppression too, no?