Lack of feminine characteristics...

reply to post by Vlena


no you are not disgusting ~!


well, maybe horribly.....

never mind.


this stuff needs to get out of "the bedroom" so to speak.

it's been talked to death behind closed doors and rarely sees the light of day.

but then again, is it biology that keeps us like this or do we have a frikin brain?!

reply to post by fooks

i think men and women need to rethink. men do not need to hunt anymore

I am all for women being treated like human beings, I am also for stay at home dad's if the situation calls for it.

But the fundamentalist feminism stuff is just not necessary. Women are not men and men are not women. If you want to say that you should be afforded every single thing the exact same way it's nonsense. And, the feminist movement seems like it's trying to make women superior not equal.

I go back to the war expression, there was something like 10% of Germany's population that died off. I wouldn't want them to be all female. For one, it would be a giant circle jerk after the war.

But since we are going on equal everything, men fought the last war so women should fight the next?

Originally posted by JonoEnglish
reply to post by polarwarrior

 

I think it's more to do with social evolution.

We don;'t have survival of the fittest in modern societies.

It's a natural progression of civilisation.

Males, don't need to be or act so aggresive. They adapt to their surroundings. Now if a SHTF situation happened, where we were lawless, then we would take a step back. The 'traditional' roles of man and women would go back to what they were to a certain degree.

It would be a step backwards though.

Not necessarily. I suggest the women really get going on some backyard generator factories, and start getting into science more. They won't be going backwards, no matter what level of barbarians sweep across the plains.

By the way, the last line is tongue in cheek. Most people see survival as dog eat dog, or survival of the fittest. I imagine instead, that it takes cohesiveness and cooperation, and teamwork. Equality gets the job done so much faster.

reply to post by Odessy


Depends on which wave of feminist movements you support.. I support first wave feminism which wanted equal rights for women.

The actual OP depicted women as aggressive and ego centric. They're not.

Originally posted by boncho
reply to post by fooks

 

i think men and women need to rethink. men do not need to hunt anymore

I am all for women being treated like human beings, I am also for stay at home dad's if the situation calls for it.

But the fundamentalist feminism stuff is just not necessary. Women are not men and men are not women. If you want to say that you should be afforded every single thing the exact same way it's nonsense. And, the feminist movement seems like it's trying to make women superior not equal.

I go back to the war expression, there was something like 10% of Germany's population that died off. I wouldn't want them to be all female. For one, it would be a giant circle jerk after the war.

But since we are going on equal everything, men fought the last war so women should fight the next?

edit on 7-3-2011 by boncho because: oops

if they want to fight, let em'.

would you rather have them die as collateral damage or hero's?

reply to post by Unity_99


I am all for chicks in science. Im a NASA seeds kid from way back and wish more women understood the sweet seduction of the lab coat.

reply to post by fooks

if they want to fight, let em'. would you rather have them die as collateral damage or hero's?

Depends, are they brought into war by the draft? Because that is a ticket for death. Nothing heroic about it, if they sign up than the are heroes.

I would hope they didn't get killed at all so when I got back home after being forced into a war I would have more options for getting laid. To be honest.

Females and the female indentities have been supressed on our world for a long time. Males have tried to assume the position of POWER that all females allready have within. Women were then led to believe otherwise. Their standing was striken from the world, their innate power within, uknown from within themsevles and in their communities.

The liberation of the female gender has WAY more to deal with than just taking back what rights were taken from them. Their slippage and movement into the ego identities of the man allready established as the now power in and of the world, has nothing to do with gaining back their own rights and freedoms and of course personal power.

Personal power in itself has nothing to do with what we are actually all led to believe it is. True power comes from within. Power of course comes from the knowing of what you are within and to live by being that which you know you yourself allready are inside. Women becoming more ego like is a confusion within that stems from not knowing who they are. There can be situations where your ego is getting out of hand and you percieve another womens power as a threat and ego centric which is false. There are literally hundreds of different ways to understand life that it almost makes no sense to debate.

The energies of the feminine have been missunderstood and lost which is a shame. Becuase within that energy lies the seat of creation. Within this energy is the cradle of creation, nature, freedom, protection, love, moon. Giving birth through the soul in an all loving and eternal sacrifice for all of us to learn and evolve through. Earth.

The male energies which also have been missunderstood or just lost, is one of union, unconditional love, understanding, peace, truth, inner knowing, Oneness, Sun. Learning through you.

They both love you beyond measure.

The union of the two in complete knowing and love allows you to be free, as you become one united, perfect being. Where you started as. You go back home, you will be given a free choice to leave or stay.

Originally posted by irsuccubus
reply to post by Unity_99

 

I am all for chicks in science. Im a NASA seeds kid from way back and wish more women understood the sweet seduction of the lab coat.

Science girls are hot.

Lab coats are sexy, I like your train of thought.

reply to post by Yeah-Alright


Very interesting... Now that you mention it, my 2 weeks traveling through Europe, I did notice as a general rule that the women seemed to have more of defined female characteristics the you find in America. I dont mean to stereotype and AM NOT saying you don't find it. Just doesn't seem to be as common in the U.S.

It's all pretty well jacked up in the 21st century.

Here in the U.S., we used copper tubing to carry our water for decades now. Copper correlates with estrogen in the body. Then we have xenoestrogens, androgen blockers, etc, etc... Since the industrial revolution, we've screwed up our hormones quite a bit.

Guys are certainly becoming more effeminate, and women more masculine on the whole. My mom is a manly woman, so I guess that explains why I'm attracted to aggressive women Not sure, really. I'm very turned off by materialistic people, woman or man.

Overall, I'd say what's happening today is pretty unnatural, and it's taking a heavy burden on society. These demoralized women are openly talking about having children out of wedlock as if it's just another casual conversation. Where have their instincts gone?! Are they truly this stupid? Have they no clue what the repercussions are of this?!

Overall, I'd say it's not just women, it's society on the whole. I see suposidely jockish guys that are shaking their asses to the gayest music in bars sometimes, or just talk super girly, and I'm like, wtf is going on here?! I'm only 28, but this was NOT normal when I was a kid or teenager. Same with the women, the level of aggressiveness is off the scales at times. Seriously, I think the testosterone in half these women is higher than in half the men out there. There are very few ladies or gentlemen out there these days.

Sad, but true.

"But the fundamentalist feminism stuff is just not necessary. Women are not men and men are not women. If you want to say that you should be afforded every single thing the exact same way it's nonsense. And, the feminist movement seems like it's trying to make women superior not equal. "

f'm, give them the reigns, let's see what they can do.


when i'm wrong, i'm wrong and admit it. no matter to whom.

people should be like that then there would be less problems.

we got women running the NWO? no prob for me.

how bad can it get?

my sis in law, retired navy intel, capt. geeze!

we are taught to protect women, they are not stupid, we are! lol.

Originally posted by boncho
reply to post by fooks

 

if they want to fight, let em'. would you rather have them die as collateral damage or hero's?

Depends, are they brought into war by the draft? Because that is a ticket for death. Nothing heroic about it, if they sign up than the are heroes.

I would hope they didn't get killed at all so when I got back home after being forced into a war I would have more options for getting laid. To be honest.

don't make me google women in war for you.

no draft is what i was saying. if they want to serve, let'em.

i got noooooo prob wit dat.

Originally posted by Xiamara
I support the femminist movement. Society is controlled by men and its should be said that women should be able to act however the choose as should men. More feminine men and androgynous gender roles i think is important to society

There are no genes determining purely feminine or male characteristics. Men use to wear pink and purple as purple was a royal colour, now if a man wears purple he's labeled gay. Times change as do social norms. its natural, its a new method of thinking. There is nothing wrong with men being more feminine or women being more masculine or holding the same values. We are all the same and the sooner we learn this the sooner we can all get along.

edit on 7-3-2011 by Xiamara because: Went on ATS before my morning coffee

ok I'm really tired of hearing the line of "Society is controlled by men". Society is NOT controlled by men. If it were i'm sure there wouldn't be a femminist movement.

Originally posted by fooks

Originally posted by boncho
reply to post by fooks

 

if they want to fight, let em'. would you rather have them die as collateral damage or hero's?

Depends, are they brought into war by the draft? Because that is a ticket for death. Nothing heroic about it, if they sign up than the are heroes.

I would hope they didn't get killed at all so when I got back home after being forced into a war I would have more options for getting laid. To be honest.

don't make me google women in war for you.

no draft is what i was saying. if they want to serve, let'em.

i got noooooo prob wit dat.

I have no problem with them serving. The point is the draft is the first thing I think of when they people say everything under the sun should be equal.

And I do know women made a huge contribution to war. I am only referring to the few times where they sent people in for systematic suicide, by draft. Normandy, Dieppe, etc. Essentially a death sentence. I can't imagine wishing that on my Mom or anyone else's.

Roles...who came up with "roles" anyway? Who decided that women should be subordinate to men? Because we are not as physically strong? When someone tells me I should know my role I'm confused, because I choose many "roles" if that's what you want to call them. I do things I choose to do, when I choose to do them. There is no "role" police I have to consult in order to decide if I want to do the dishes or mow the lawn, work on the car or fix my computer. Gender based roles are a thing of the past. I do what needs to be done. For right now, I am a student, I do not work because I chose to not work while I go to school, I suppose I'm taking on the homemaker role, I clean, cook, do laundry w/e needs to be done. I do that because it's my choice to do that. After I finish school and have this baby, and go back to work my husband will be the homemaker while he takes his classes. Because we think of each other as equals I'm not subordinate to him but we still seem to have a working relationship...weeeeird. He doesn't require that I "nurse" his wounds after a long day of providing and protecting me (gimme a break) I hug him tell him I love him because I do, not because that's what my "role" requires me to do. If a woman chooses to put her career above all else I really don't see a problem unless her children (if there are any) are suffering without a parent whether it be father grandparents w/e being there when they need them. To be honest, I don't really care what other people think my "role" should be.

Originally posted by boncho, reply #6
reply to post by soficrow

 

Boncho - so far you've written 5 hostile responses to my one post. I think I'll wait til you're done flailing, but FYI - I don't fight.

No actually, you made personal insinuations about me (and the girls I've dated in the past and you know nothing about them so you are ignorant for trying to say you do)

Actually, you've been complaining about women, your girlfriends and American womens' inadequacies with reference to your personal experience, and said: I can't remember for the life of me the last girl I dated who knew how to cook, or cooked often.

Based on your litany of complaints and the above comment, I responded, Most likely there's a very good reason why you're only interested in young, immature, undeveloped and apparently, selfish women.

Then you disclose that three "girls" you've dated include, in your words: "Medical Field, Business Owner and Business Owner." I'm flummoxed! …Why on Earth would you date professional women when what you say you want is a "girl" and a stay-at-home wife?!?

Clearly I hit the nail on the head when I recommended that You need to get clear on what you really want AND what you're willing to put on the table to get it. And quit bitching because arm candy is just arm candy.

You say,

"I don't know why you made this personal."

…I didn't. You did. You're the one who put your personal experiences up for discussion. I simply responded to your personal references. And I stand by my analysis that your personal dissatisfactions are rooted in your "looking for all the wrong things in all the wrong places."

Thanks for this:

Oh, btw, good call on bringing up the containments. If you look at in certain areas of the world there are men who are not reaching full puberty, they kind of just stop, and it has been linked to a number of chemicals. Atrozine being one.

...Not just certain areas of the world. loam's thread outlines the breadth of the problems occurring, how they've reached crisis point, and have spread from male animals to male humans, and around the world.

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander

Originally posted by StigShen
There can be only one leader, in any group.

Let me just point out that in a real group, the leader is rarely the guy jumping up and down and saying "hey! Look at me! Im the boss! Hey! Im a man goddammit!"

You know why that is? Because the people jumping up and down trying to get everyone to pay attention to them are NOT the natural born leaders...

Can't disagree with anything you said there. But look who is jumping up and down all the time making a scene. Men are the inherent and natural leaders of the family unit. And with good reason. When the unit is attacked, it falls upon the man to defend the unit.

I was thinking earlier today that its funny how we are having this conversation today as it also happens to be international womens day.

www.internationalwomensday.com...

They were discussing similar issues as some of the ones raised in this thread on the radio all morning.