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.

 

Why men are in trouble

page: 14
11
<< 11  12  13    15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 02:56 AM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 


Ahhh, your avatar is supposed to be intimidating. Not. I stand by my statements. Women are the most powerful beings in our small universe.

They all are the leaders. The most beautiful people and caring people. Men are such losesr compared to women.
edit on 9-10-2011 by brilab45 because: (no reason given)

edit on 9-10-2011 by brilab45 because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 04:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by brilab45

Ahhh, your avatar is supposed to be intimidating. Not.


Huh? naw, it's just a picture, man. Don't get too woozy over it.



I stand by my statements.


I note that "standing by" doesn't equate to "being able to support with logical reasoning", particularly in this case.



Women are the most powerful beings in our small universe.


Well now, I'll admit that they are where some of the nicest things in life are found, but I wouldn't carry on to the "all powerful being" status! Ain't NOBODY got "power" over you that you didn't give it to to begin with, and you couldn't give it if you didn't HAVE it to give, so I'd have to say YOU are the most powerful being in your own little universe. Who you choose to give power over yourself to ain't my concern.



They all are the leaders.


No one can lead those who will not be led. Again, who YOU choose to give power over yourself isn't any of my business. Just 'cause someone can lead YOU around by the ... nose... or whatever it is they're leading you by, doesn't mean I'm gonna let them lead ME into a trap!



The most beautiful people and caring people. Men are such losesr compared to women.


Oh! I see now. You're trying to talk your way out of some doghouse some woman put you in, aren't you?


Chin up, man - maybe she WILL read this! Just leave the post open on the computer screen and go to bed - or sofa, if that's where she's put you. Nature will take it's course. Women CAN NOT resist reading stuff that's just laying around open!






edit on 2011/10/9 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 05:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by brilab45
OP, it is about time we have the sacred feminine come back to our world. If women came in control of our world, we would become far more enlightened.

Women are far more enabled beyond us men. They have strength that is much different than males. I'm looking forward to the better sex leading us into the future.

How unbelievable that we require women not only work, but also fulfill all duties in the home environment.

Slavery ended with Lincoln. Yet women take the burden of life and excel. They may not like it, but they do it. Women should rule the world and they...... more than deserve the position. The world will die with men in control.

Look at history. Women are far stronger and outlive us pig men.




brilab45,

Went to public school and got a bad case of institutional dumbness..spouting off stock phrases about "Enlightenment"??? Never got past public education non standards?? A television and movie education is what public school has become and you show all the symptoms.

Enlightened!! Wow!! I will remind you that since the time of the "Enlightenment" There have been more wars and more people slaughtered across this globe than in the centuries prior...and at a faster rate.

Be very careful what you think is Enlightenment.

Think about this one while you are being so Enlightened.

How many of the women in this world...no matter what their education levels..are going to take the RISKS needed to keep and maintain the systems which make them comfortable, more productive, and safe?? How many of them even know how they work ..how they operate??

One has to go to public school and be educated to get dumb enough to overlook this view and understanding of the world outside our doors.

Women as a whole are not big RISK takers. They are not interested in working or TAKING RISKS for which their beauty or sexuality assets can be put in jeopardy or danger. This is an important clue to female socialization.

It is the ability to take RISKS which separates the male from the female...No matter what the educational levels which are being boasted about.

Women may take risks for children but few will take RISKS for a man.

None of these concepts and understandings are brought out in links by the OP or any other Social type articles.

Another thing. Even people with educations are being laid off today. It used to be that an Education gauranteed one a job in the marketplace. This is not so today ..male and female both. They are both finding themselves out of work.



brilab45,


Ahhh, your avatar is supposed to be intimidating. Not. I stand by my statements. Women are the most powerful beings in our small universe.

They all are the leaders. The most beautiful people and caring people. Men are such losesr compared to women.


Your television and movie education is showing here. Public education non standards.

Women who are so caring are this way because someone has put a safety net under them that they can afford to be so caring. Someone has taken the harsh RISKS out of life for them by taking on the RISKS for them.
When the social structure breaks down because of so much Enlightenment going around...you are going to see the women backing off and demanding a bigger safety net from someone else's RISK Taking.

Dont worry ..most men are way to dumb to comprehend this in lieu of sports, video games, and alcohol/cheerleaders. But not all of us.

Your thought process is not intimidating. It is not even thoughtful.

However..alot of males of today are in the same boat..having been raised in front of a television set, movies, and peer group and facillitated in this by the women being the primary influence in their lives and using these mediums as a babysitter. There are few real male influences in the lives of either the women or the children. They are mostly "High Maintenance" with someone else taking the RISKS out of life for them...ie..government.

Some of this quickly becomes "Entitlement" thinking of which we see so much today. And this shows up in adulthood.

You have made two posts here with the same premise ...public school education non standards.

When the going gets rough..most of the women I have ever met want a "Man" to get going for them. A man to take the harsh RISKS out of life for them and children. No matter what the social structure is in the nation they are dwelling.

Men who can only define themselves by what they consume, including Sex and sexuality, are no different than many women. And this is not accidental...but deliberate. One has to be educated into such dumbness and ignorance. People left to their own devices are not this naturally dumb.

As the Economy winds down into Engineered, Enlightened Chaos..we are going to see this borne out.


nenothtu,

I like your style. I agree with what you are saying. You say it with a different style and flair than would I but nonetheless you say it and dont pull the punches. You also say it with fewer words.


Thanks,
Orangetom
edit on 9-10-2011 by orangetom1999 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 06:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by orangetom1999
nenothtu,

I like your style. I agree with what you are saying. You say it with a different style and flair than would I but nonetheless you say it and dont pull the punches. You also say it with fewer words.


Thanks,
Orangetom


Thank you. I got a lot of my education in public schools, but not my learning. that had a different source altogether. I'm sure you are one who will appreciate the difference. On top of that, my public school education wasn't in a normal public school, it was in a hillbilly public school. the influences of the "new math" hadn't made any inroads into the backwoods at that point.

I had the benefit of some pretty good teachers in that environment - for example, an English teacher who was convinced that the purpose of language was to communicate, and if one wasn't getting his point across, there must be something wrong with his English.

All this hippy tree-huggin' "enlightenment" nonsense was what we called "a bit tetched in th' haid". An "Earth Mother" might be that old woman who lived out in a shack in the woods by herself, and "worked the roots", but you dare not ask her - she might take exception to that!

Back there, men were men, and women were more than happy to let them be men, and didn't pick any bones about it. I got down to the flatlands several years ago, and discovered that something had gone horribly wrong with the Human Race down here - the men were men, and so were the women! At first, I couldn't quite suss out the silly games they play, but I'm a fairly quick study, and got up to speed pretty quick. the thing was, my upbringings gave me an odd perspective on things. I tend to see what is rather than what is presented, and that has caused no end of consternation, because I call it like I see it. That perspective wasn't a function of my education, it was a function of my learning.

I think I remember you - tell the folks at Briarfield I said "howdy"!




edit on 2011/10/9 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 06:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by Revolution9

Hey big boy, what is that comment all about.


It was a direct response to your comment suggesting that the only sort of "man" is a limp-wristed milquetoast sort of a guy, and your implications that male roles that have existed for thousands of years, fairly successfully or they would have been diluted far sooner, are somehow "Victorian". News flash - I'm way, WAY PRE-Victorian. You'll never catch me in one of those sissy starched collars they wore. The implication you make that any man who doesn't want to help the little missus pick out the color scheme for the wallpaper is somehow to be equated with a wife beater was excessively offensive.

I responded to that. Handle it.



You obviously like fighting,


"Fighting not good. Someone always get hurt". - Mr. Miyagi



you talk about it a lot.


More than any woman I know. it's mostly grunts and whistles though, so don't worry about it - you'll never get it deciphered.



I am saying that we don't have to conform to stereotypes and social engineering. I am proof of that. I don't want to be like you, understand? I want to be like me. You have nothing to teach me. May be I have nothing to teach you.


And I am saying that we don't have to conform to your modernistic stereotypes and modern version of social engineering. One is as bad as the other. I don't want to be like you, either, and the beauty of it is neither of us has to conform to the ideals of the other.

I may have something to "teach" you, but you'll never learn it, so I'll just go kill another wildebeest instead.



Your comment about me was badly put together and very unfair.


Indeed. Ponder that statement deeply. It came from your own mouth... er, fingers.



Expect a strong response when you dishonor me like that. Be a gentleMAN.


I can't. Gentlemen haven't yet been invented in my archaic era. I wouldn't wear those sissy starched collars anyhow,








Firstly, what the heck do you mean "sissy starched collars"?

I offered no stereotype. All I wrote is that we should have freedom to define what we are for ourselves, be that like you or me.

And you still haven't added anything constructive to the debate here.

What is your idea of a man? You have not given that, atall. You have just tried to rubbish my comments.

Why don't you have a god old think about your definition of what it is to be a guy in the modern world. I have done that. I want to know what your ideas are. It would be more constructive to possibly learn from you than this stupid tit for tat.

I am not saying it is wrong to be you. I am saying it no longer works for me to be weighed against the old stereotypes. You're telling me that I should not be allowed to do this because it is sissy.

I think I am wasting my time here because I think you are just baiting me, but I'll try anyway.

Peace.



posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 06:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Revolution9

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by Revolution9

Hey big boy, what is that comment all about.


It was a direct response to your comment suggesting that the only sort of "man" is a limp-wristed milquetoast sort of a guy, and your implications that male roles that have existed for thousands of years, fairly successfully or they would have been diluted far sooner, are somehow "Victorian". News flash - I'm way, WAY PRE-Victorian. You'll never catch me in one of those sissy starched collars they wore. The implication you make that any man who doesn't want to help the little missus pick out the color scheme for the wallpaper is somehow to be equated with a wife beater was excessively offensive.

I responded to that. Handle it.



You obviously like fighting,


"Fighting not good. Someone always get hurt". - Mr. Miyagi



you talk about it a lot.


More than any woman I know. it's mostly grunts and whistles though, so don't worry about it - you'll never get it deciphered.



I am saying that we don't have to conform to stereotypes and social engineering. I am proof of that. I don't want to be like you, understand? I want to be like me. You have nothing to teach me. May be I have nothing to teach you.


And I am saying that we don't have to conform to your modernistic stereotypes and modern version of social engineering. One is as bad as the other. I don't want to be like you, either, and the beauty of it is neither of us has to conform to the ideals of the other.

I may have something to "teach" you, but you'll never learn it, so I'll just go kill another wildebeest instead.



Your comment about me was badly put together and very unfair.


Indeed. Ponder that statement deeply. It came from your own mouth... er, fingers.



Expect a strong response when you dishonor me like that. Be a gentleMAN.


I can't. Gentlemen haven't yet been invented in my archaic era. I wouldn't wear those sissy starched collars anyhow,








Firstly, what the heck do you mean "sissy starched collars"?

I offered no stereotype. All I wrote is that we should have freedom to define what we are for ourselves, be that like you or me.

And you still haven't added anything constructive to the debate here.

What is your idea of a man? You have not given that, atall. You have just tried to rubbish my comments.

Why don't you have a god old think about your definition of what it is to be a guy in the modern world. I have done that. I want to know what your ideas are. It would be more constructive to possibly learn from you than this stupid tit for tat.

I am not saying it is wrong to be you. I am saying it no longer works for me to be weighed against the old stereotypes. You're telling me that I should not be allowed to do this because it is sissy.

I think I am wasting my time here because I think you are just baiting me, but I'll try anyway.

Peace.


"It was a direct response to your comment suggesting that the only sort of "man" is a limp-wristed milquetoast sort of a guy".

You are telling a lie because I never wrote anything of the sort. That is what you decided you thought I meant. If you tell lies about what I've written again I will say something about it. I think you are really mean to do that to me. That is nasty and dishonest and shows what kind of person you are.

I am not wasting my precious fingers on you anymore. Tell as many lies as you like. You really offended me there and prove me right that men are like brutes.

See ya later, Captain Caveman.

(well p#ssed that you made up lies like that!!!)
edit on 9-10-2011 by Revolution9 because: spelling



posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 06:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by brilab45

Ahhh, your avatar is supposed to be intimidating. Not.


Huh? naw, it's just a picture, man. Don't get too woozy over it.



I stand by my statements.


I note that "standing by" doesn't equate to "being able to support with logical reasoning", particularly in this case.



Women are the most powerful beings in our small universe.


Well now, I'll admit that they are where some of the nicest things in life are found, but I wouldn't carry on to the "all powerful being" status! Ain't NOBODY got "power" over you that you didn't give it to to begin with, and you couldn't give it if you didn't HAVE it to give, so I'd have to say YOU are the most powerful being in your own little universe. Who you choose to give power over yourself to ain't my concern.



They all are the leaders.


No one can lead those who will not be led. Again, who YOU choose to give power over yourself isn't any of my business. Just 'cause someone can lead YOU around by the ... nose... or whatever it is they're leading you by, doesn't mean I'm gonna let them lead ME into a trap!



The most beautiful people and caring people. Men are such losesr compared to women.


Oh! I see now. You're trying to talk your way out of some doghouse some woman put you in, aren't you?


Chin up, man - maybe she WILL read this! Just leave the post open on the computer screen and go to bed - or sofa, if that's where she's put you. Nature will take it's course. Women CAN NOT resist reading stuff that's just laying around open!






edit on 2011/10/9 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



You are a bully as far as I can tell from what you write. Plain and simple. You are very rude and arrogant and just the kind of person I have nothing to do with because that type of person is overbearing, is not able to reason without ridiculing others and has to put others down to make yourself look bigger. That is what I think of you now. Well done!



posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 07:04 AM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 




Thank you. I got a lot of my education in public schools, but not my learning. that had a different source altogether. I'm sure you are one who will appreciate the difference.


I do indeed Sir. And well stated. Learning is indeed very different from education. Well said.

Let me say that I am not against education..not at all. I do not however put much stock in todays public education non standards majoring in movies, television, and emotions/instant gratification/emotional justifications.

For I know that being a man is often verily RISK TAKING. And to accomplish this a man needs stow or control his emotions or he will hurt/kill himself and others around him.

Men know this instinctively. Drama Queens so not..male and female ..Drama Queens.

Were I to return back to school today I am not sure I would get along with the cirriculum or the teachers/professors.

I also know something from history. In nations where the education levels are not high..a teacher is a very valued and respected occupation. This is not so in America..not for a long time now.
This is very telling to those of us who can think outside the television or movie standards of today.

One can often see this in posts her on ATS. That they have a heavy movie/television education..not many real life experiences or knowledge. Here on this very page..

posted by Revolution 9


"Fighting not good. Someone always get hurt". - Mr. Miyagi


Now that I have taught myself to see it for what it is..I spot it very quickly and note so to the readers out here such that they too will begin to spot it in the people to whom they come in contact. Their movie and television educational levels. Astonishing how many cannot describe a concept or understanding outside of a movie or television program they have watched. This is a tell tale of limited life experience that one must reference a movie line.



Revolution9,


I offered no stereotype. All I wrote is that we should have freedom to define what we are for ourselves, be that like you or me.

And you still haven't added anything constructive to the debate here.


I dont know if you comprehend this about men...men who know about other men..will often try them..try them to see of what they are made. The purpose of this is to separate the men from the boys. This tells a man if another man can be counted on when the going gets tough and rough. Can this man be counted on to carry his weight and if needed..even more. Or will he be a burden...high maintenance as are many women.

Men who know this fingerprint of male conduct..will give back as good as they get...or tell the other person to piss off. Which for many men is sufficient.
This is not competition per se..but fact finding...sensing of what another is made. And there is a rationale behind it and a good one.

But proper men will want to know of what other men are made ..particularly in difficult/harsh enviornments. This is not generally a motivation in feminine enviornments or female socialization. Nor is it a facet of pubic education.
The comfort levels of many womans occupations lends itself more to social competition...ie...status than working together.

For men who know or can gauge the level of another man's soul can know how far he will work or how far he can be pushed or draw on disciplines to accomplish under difficult/'dangerous conditions. This is not a concept or understanding found among most women or in such feminine social circles.
Women may understand it ...but they do not gravitate towards it..nor do many want to get near it.

I am choosey about the males with whom I socialize and I choose to socialize with very very few. I am not interested in what passes for most of manhood today.Nor am I interested in what passes for most of womanhood today as well. I am very choosy about the woman on whom I will spend my monies earned often at great RISK.

It is not difficult out here to get a woman to take off her clothes. It is difficult to get many of them to give me something..a commodity of real intrinsic value.

Thanks,
Orangetom
edit on 9-10-2011 by orangetom1999 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 07:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Revolution9

Firstly, what the heck do you mean "sissy starched collars"?


Are you so wholly unfamiliar with the Victorians that you are unaware of what a "starched collar" is?



I offered no stereotype. All I wrote is that we should have freedom to define what we are for ourselves, be that like you or me.


What was the whole "Victorian wife beater" thing then?



And you still haven't added anything constructive to the debate here.


I guess that depends on your notion of what constitutes "constructive".



What is your idea of a man? You have not given that, atall.


Of course I have. I'll wait a bit, and let you get caught upon my posts.



Why don't you have a god old think about your definition of what it is to be a guy in the modern world.


A guy is a guy. Technological development should not affect what is essentially a biological reality. No reason a brand new iPod should make me act all crazy, like something I am not. The key here, I think, is to be true to one's self, whatever that "self" is.



I am not saying it is wrong to be you. I am saying it no longer works for me to be weighed against the old stereotypes.


isn't it just as wrong to be weighed against any stereotypes, whether "old" ones or new?



You're telling me that I should not be allowed to do this because it is sissy.


You should be allowed to do as you will. I'm not sure why "sissy" bothers you in re Victorian starched collars. You aren't a Victorian, are you?



I think I am wasting my time here because I think you are just baiting me, but I'll try anyway.


You're only wasting your time if you fail to see. Yes, I AM baiting you, and there is a method to my madness. the objective is to get you to think, rather than just "feel", to see your own words as if for the first time, as if they come from a stranger.

Which they might.



posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 07:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by Revolution9

Firstly, what the heck do you mean "sissy starched collars"?


Are you so wholly unfamiliar with the Victorians that you are unaware of what a "starched collar" is?



I offered no stereotype. All I wrote is that we should have freedom to define what we are for ourselves, be that like you or me.


What was the whole "Victorian wife beater" thing then?



And you still haven't added anything constructive to the debate here.


I guess that depends on your notion of what constitutes "constructive".



What is your idea of a man? You have not given that, atall.


Of course I have. I'll wait a bit, and let you get caught upon my posts.



Why don't you have a god old think about your definition of what it is to be a guy in the modern world.


A guy is a guy. Technological development should not affect what is essentially a biological reality. No reason a brand new iPod should make me act all crazy, like something I am not. The key here, I think, is to be true to one's self, whatever that "self" is.



I am not saying it is wrong to be you. I am saying it no longer works for me to be weighed against the old stereotypes.


isn't it just as wrong to be weighed against any stereotypes, whether "old" ones or new?



You're telling me that I should not be allowed to do this because it is sissy.


You should be allowed to do as you will. I'm not sure why "sissy" bothers you in re Victorian starched collars. You aren't a Victorian, are you?



I think I am wasting my time here because I think you are just baiting me, but I'll try anyway.


You're only wasting your time if you fail to see. Yes, I AM baiting you, and there is a method to my madness. the objective is to get you to think, rather than just "feel", to see your own words as if for the first time, as if they come from a stranger.

Which they might.





Thank you. That was much better and I am sorry I got a bit heated there. I am not in this to tell other people they are wrong. I am here to give my experiences and learn from the words of others.

For me the identity crisis has been very real. The decision I made was to create my own concept of what it means for me to be male.

I took a long hard look at myself.

I grew up on a very rough council estate and it was a very brutal upbringing. I did not want my whole life to be only that. I find the domineering side of men to be hard to handle. I don't want to compete all the time, trapped in some primitive, unconscious pattern. It bores me silly. If that is the way we get our partners then I am not interested. I posted earlier, I just want a good friendship with my partner and not feel that I am trapping her. I been there once before and it was horrible.

I feel for men because we have been abused badly, too. We were and are still being used as canon fodder. All under the glory of being a warrior. Even the warrior now does his work via a console, like killing is a play station game. There is no honor in it anymore. Like with what we have done to Arabs; they had bows and arrows and we had lightning.

One thing none of us can argue is that before it has been acceptable for men to abuse women; in terms of rape, domestic violence, etc - where even the law turned and still sometimes turns a blind eye.

Women were right to challenge this. The consequences have been huge. If we are to maintain civilization then we must keep looking forward and look for fairness for all genders; in law, in society and in our own hearts.


edit on 9-10-2011 by Revolution9 because: spelling



posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 08:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Partygirl
 


In fact, I must tell you that as a man I have been badly bullied in the work place for being too much of a colourful bird. Happened twice, but not a third time. The last time they took me out I played up so much that it has cost them a fortune. The bank suffered (I could not pay my debts anymore), the tax payers still suffer because I am long term sick and claiming welfare), there was a heap of embarrassment all round. I cost the NHS a fortune (National Health Service). It is ongoing. It is very stupid. All I want is to go to work each day NOT under the shadow that I am going to be treated like a piece of #it. They gave me a nervous breakdown (twice). My sanity can't take it anymore. A very high profile Doctor signed me off work for life because he knew what I had been through and saw, too, that people like me get abused in society because I think very very differently.

I am not setting foot into the work place until I can have some rights to fair treatment and not get bullied and alienated just for being me.

So, what is it to be? Me keep heaping up the damage on society? Or society give me a chance to lead a life that the majority are being allowed to live?

Survival is something I am very very good at. That is the main purpose of being a male. Let me be clear, to mess with me anymore will cost top dollar.

That is why I find sympathy with the abused members of society; victims of child abuse, domestic violence, minority cultures and asylum seekers. When you are on the weaker minority end of the stick it is very unpleasant and it led me to the conclusion that this world is just BRUTAL. I am sick of brutal behavior.


edit on 9-10-2011 by Revolution9 because: punctuation



posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 08:22 AM
link   
Pre-script: Don't take anything I say too literally just yet - I'm still catching up after getting home from work.



Originally posted by Revolution9

You are telling a lie because I never wrote anything of the sort.


You didn't write anything of the sort, you suggested it, just as I said. if need be, I'll go back and sort that out for you.



If you tell lies about what I've written again I will say something about it. I think you are really mean to do that to me. That is nasty and dishonest and shows what kind of person you are.


"Mean" and "nasty" I am - those are fairly accurate descriptors - but dishonest I am not. Nor have I "lied" anywhere. Again, if need be I'll go back through your posts and sort that out for you.



I am not wasting my precious fingers on you anymore. Tell as many lies as you like. You really offended me there and prove me right that men are like brutes.

See ya later, Captain Caveman.


Well then, that's your choice and your privilege. Oddly, perhaps, we seem to be in agreement that men are "brutes". I think perhaps we may define that word slightly differently, however. Maybe not - what does "knuckle dragging Neanderthal" mean in your part of the world? I ask because that is precisely how I defined myself from the very beginning, and it would seem to be fairly close to "brute" around here.

None of us has any sort of right to protect against being offended, so please don't ask me if I care about that... if it soothes your jangled feelings, however, I will apologize for being the offensive brute I am. I'll STILL be an offensive brute, however - I'll just be apologetic about it.


(well p#ssed that you made up lies like that!!!)


*Yawn*

Apologies - that must have been the knuckle-dragging, mouth breathing, offensive Neanderthal brute in me rearing his ugly head again...

See ya later - Cpt. Caveman, over and out.



edit on 2011/10/9 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 08:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Revolution9
 



Here is a good video by John Lennon. It gives a clear idea of the sentiments back in the early 70s when the women's movement was gathering pace. I think John's social commentary here was bang on.



edit on 9-10-2011 by Revolution9 because: problem sorted



posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 08:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Revolution9

You are a bully as far as I can tell from what you write. Plain and simple. You are very rude and arrogant and just the kind of person I have nothing to do with because that type of person is overbearing, is not able to reason without ridiculing others and has to put others down to make yourself look bigger. That is what I think of you now. Well done!


You wound me, sir! How could anyone think such of me?

If you'll excuse me, I think I'll slink off now to lick my wounds, and balm them with broads and beer!

I will ensure that no feminists are involved in the debauchery - that would just be too much for one day!



posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 08:32 AM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 


Cool! Personally, I think there is room for both of us in this world. I am glad you are there and who you are. I don't want us all to be the same anyway.

However, there are some real problems in this world and there are reasons why those problems are there. I am just soul searching because I have been on the receiving end of those "problems".

All I ask of you is that you quote me fairly and not just slam me down. I have a right to express myself and what I think in public as you do. I always react very defensively when I am dealt with unfairly.



posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 08:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by orangetom1999

I also know something from history. In nations where the education levels are not high..a teacher is a very valued and respected occupation. This is not so in America..not for a long time now.
This is very telling to those of us who can think outside the television or movie standards of today.

One can often see this in posts her on ATS. That they have a heavy movie/television education..not many real life experiences or knowledge. Here on this very page..

posted by Revolution 9


"Fighting not good. Someone always get hurt". - Mr. Miyagi


Now that I have taught myself to see it for what it is..I spot it very quickly and note so to the readers out here such that they too will begin to spot it in the people to whom they come in contact. Their movie and television educational levels. Astonishing how many cannot describe a concept or understanding outside of a movie or television program they have watched. This is a tell tale of limited life experience that one must reference a movie line.


It was actually me who said that - it was a re-quote in one of the "whole post" quotes he re-posted. I said that for a reason - I try to target the reader in some way that they will have a visceral understanding of. I fear I may have gotten TOO visceral in his case... some people are very touchy and literal folk.

It's the same line I use on my teenage son, because he can grasp it, and it sticks in his mind. He knows what a scrapper I am, but he also knows that I don't scrap without cause or for no reason. That's what the line means to him, and what I was attempting to convey as a response to the allegation that I "talk about fighting" constantly. Of course i DO talk about fighting, or in terms of combat frequently, but never without cause. The cause may just not be as apparent to some as it is to others.

It seems the point was either glossed over, or not well taken. it's hard to tell which.



posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 08:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Revolution9
 


Just in case you missed the quick pre-script edit I did above: don't take anything i say too literally just yet - I'm still catching up on the thread after getting home from work...



posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 08:48 AM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 



You're only wasting your time if you fail to see. Yes, I AM baiting you, and there is a method to my madness. the objective is to get you to think, rather than just "feel", to see your own words as if for the first time, as if they come from a stranger.

Which they might.



nenothtu,

LOL LOL LOL...

I'm going to make some popcorn and a drink. I'll be back to get a front row seat!!

I am being humorous of course. This is a serious topic and hope some of us learn from it.

But nonetheless thanks for the show. I am indeed putting on my thinking cap.



Revolution9,


For me the identity crisis has been very real. The decision I made was to create my own concept of what it means for me to be male.

I took a long hard look at myself.


As have we all. However I will caution you about technology. Techonology is fine and a wonder to behold. It is not life itself. The problem with technology is that it is technology and often very complex and dependent on many parts of the technology chain. Any one link goes down and the whole chain becomes useless.

For a man knows that he may be called on to do or perform ..often at great RISK/RISKS..without technology..without any "Safety Net " into which he might fall...fini....end of story.

Not only must he know about the technology but also what and how to get by without the technology. By the very crudest of methods and knowledge. For he will have no Safety Net other than what he can devise and or make himself..or the help of trusted friends or associates. No lightweights need apply here.
Men know this about life and other men.
Xerox copies of modern technology will not work here and when.

I am often astonished when the electronic cash registers go out and no one knows how to do long hand math with a paper and pencil. Astonishing. Everything comes to a halt. What a stupid bunch of people.




One thing none of us can argue is that before it has been acceptable for men to abuse women; in terms of rape, domestic violence, etc - where even the law turned and still sometimes turns a blind eye.

Women were right to challenge this. The consequences have been huge. If we are to maintain civilization then we must keep looking forward and look for fairness for all genders; in law, in society and in our own hearts.


You need to think the above quote through alot more. A whole lot more.

Most of the females I know are not interested in "Fairness." They are interested in "Expediency." Translate that as "Options."

Only a male can miss out on this for females do not.

Also ..though I do not often clarify the distinction..there is a difference in a male and a man. As there is a difference in a female and a woman.

Think about this too...


I feel for men because we have been abused badly, too. We were and are still being used as canon fodder. All under the glory of being a warrior. Even the warrior now does his work via a console, like killing is a play station game. There is no honor in it anymore. Like with what we have done to Arabs; they had bows and arrows and we had lightning.


I dont know what you are thinking here but there is nothing glorious about being a warrior. You are away from home for long periods of time. Being assaulted and abused by your allies as well as enemies. Hard harsh conditions. Being where one does not want to be.
Killing is killing no matter who does it. It is not a game. Someone killing behind a console will not know this truth. Also console killing will not win todays wars ..nor yesterdays wars as well. Someone has to go in to occupy unless you want the war to go on forever...and it looks like that is the intent today.

As for the Arabs...I dont feel sorry for them. For they too, when of mind and soul, will kill you if you blink. The discipline is not to blink or let them see you blink. This is a trait, I believe, long gone from much of our current crop of non leadership.

Only a television/movie education in public schools can lend itself to what you posted above.
Those who have been out here awhile know differently.
Hope this helps you Revolution9.

Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 09:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by brilab45
OP, it is about time we have the sacred feminine come back to our world. If women came in control of our world, we would become far more enlightened.

Women are far more enabled beyond us men. They have strength that is much different than males. I'm looking forward to the better sex leading us into the future.

How unbelievable that we require women not only work, but also fulfill all duties in the home environment.

Slavery ended with Lincoln. Yet women take the burden of life and excel. They may not like it, but they do it. Women should rule the world and they...... more than deserve the position. The world will die with men in control.

Look at history. Women are far stronger and outlive us pig men.



This is just sad. but it highlights another feminism-inspired stealth attack on masculinity..spiritualism. Now, as someone who has delved into the esoteric side of things, due to some paranormal experiences, I found a lot of talk about the "sacred feminine" dressed up all kinds of ways..and I found that much of it was just another female attack on men dressed up as enlightenment of some kind. from knights templar groups to people who believe they are from the pleiades, you hear it. now, dude, I really think you need to strap your balls on, rediscover your manhood and self-respect and wake the # up.



posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 09:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Revolution9
Thank you. That was much better and I am sorry I got a bit heated there. I am not in this to tell other people they are wrong. I am here to give my experiences and learn from the words of others.


No problem. I heat people up, often on purpose. I expect a strong reaction.



For me the identity crisis has been very real. The decision I made was to create my own concept of what it means for me to be male.

I took a long hard look at myself.


And THAT, to my mind, is what a "real man" is. He is his OWN man, not dependent on stereotypes, or what others think he should be. Congratulations! You asked me how I defined "man", and then proceeded to give me my own definition.



I grew up on a very rough council estate and it was a very brutal upbringing. I did not want my whole life to be only that. I find the domineering side of men to be hard to handle. I don't want to compete all the time, trapped in some primitive, unconscious pattern. It bores me silly. If that is the way we get our partners then I am not interested. I posted earlier, I just want a good friendship with my partner and not feel that I am trapping her. I been there once before and it was horrible.


believe it or not, I agree. If a man feels a need to be domineering, then as far as I'm concerned he's putting his own insecurity on display for the world to see. There is, to my mind, a fine line between "aggressive" and "domineering". Fine, but not to be crossed. "Aggressive" has it's place, but "domineering" continues long after aggressive has become unnecessary. I reckon you could say that I see "domineering" as "aggressive" past it's expiration date.

I'm not very competitive, either. No need to be constantly "proving myself" by trying to measure up against others. I already know who and what I am, no proofs necessary. An example is my dislike of sports. they bore me nearly to tears, and seem a waste of otherwise perfectly useful time, as I said above. I don't waste time playing them, I don't waste time watching them, and I don't faulty those who do. After all, it's THEIR time to do with as they will.



I feel for men because we have been abused badly, too. We were and are still being used as canon fodder. All under the glory of being a warrior. Even the warrior now does his work via a console, like killing is a play station game. There is no honor in it anymore. Like with what we have done to Arabs; they had bows and arrows and we had lightning.


I've been cannon fodder. Honor is where you find it. I wasn't a console commando - mine was up close and personal. I've often asked myself is it more honorable to take a life, or to save one? Some times, the two are one. I know what my answer is for myself, and other folks will have to sort out their own answers. No two people are the same, and so we all have to find our own individual answers, we each have to be at peace with ourselves before we can be at peace with the rest of the world.

We have to be comfortable in our own skins, whatever that skin may be.



One thing none of us can argue is that before it has been acceptable for men to abuse women; in terms of rape, domestic violence, etc - where even the law turned and still sometimes turns a blind eye.


I think rape and spousal abuse should be hanging offenses, but that's just me. Where I come from, we tend to treat women a little different than they do here in the flatlands. "Blackguarding" is not tolerated very well there, although it sometimes occurs in the more insecure sorts. if some other man doesn't whip the blackguard, the woman probably will. At the very least, it's not safe to ever go to sleep around her again.



Women were right to challenge this. The consequences have been huge. If we are to maintain civilization then we must keep looking forward and look for fairness for all genders; in law, in society and in our own hearts.


yes, they were right to challenge it, but in some cases that challenge has gone too far, and is bordering, or outright crossing the line of, "domineering".

And that shows insecurities in women just as much as it does in men.




edit on 2011/10/9 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 11  12  13    15  16 >>

log in

join