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: 16
11
<< 13  14  15   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 10:41 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 


Oh, I can come up with worst. BTW...I starred your comment. It was funny to me. I'm sure you are good guy for the most part. Just had to have my word. No bad feelings here. Your cool.




posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 09:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Bluesma
 


Bluesma,


The claim that the system is trying to feminize males to « make them malleable and controllable to the feminine system. To remove the natural aggressiveness/RISK TAKING out of them. To make them just like everyone else...a good consumer. A xerox copy.
Not an individual thinker or doer. But instead a controllable malleable xerox copy. »

Could be used with equal force as explanation for the feminist movement, seeking to masculinize women, to remove the natural sensitivity /risk taking out of them. To make them a good consumer, and a controllable malleable zerox copy »


This is a good point and I am glad that you brought this up.
Here in the West I perceive pretty much this happening with the proviso that the women here are not looking to take on traditional male roles. They are interested in working within a female social paradigm to do more women's roles...ie...Options.
However ..the deteriorating condition of many women here in the West due to this quest for more Options/instant gratification is putting alot of women in the news today and not in a favorable light. Many are making train wrecks out of their lives...and also unfortunately the lives of the children. Crime statistics are beginning to bear this out as many women opt for more instant gratification by way of anyone and anything..including working the system.

When a peoples primary thought process and value system is from a movie/television education..ie..emotional instant gratification thinking ..this is the byproduct...the result. I dont think this accidental.

Here in the West...women have more television time directed to them..more product line...more choices....et al.
One trip into any store around here and one can see it clearly. More magazines, more books ..more of any category of consumer product line directed to them.

This is not a definition of a "Victimized " Group of peoples.

However..most men or males do not seem to be capable of analyzing or thinking this through for themselves. To much sports and cheerleader thinking going on.

I gotta tell you Bluesma..I will be so glad when football season is over. That is all most of the male around me seem capable of discussing. It is like a drug habit to them. The gods of sports.




Women accepted this proposal to try out a different way of living and being because they wanted to. They wanted to see what it is like on the other side of the fence, and get to know their own masculine side. So they did. In my perception they have developed it rather well on the whole, and shown they are perfectly capable- but many are finding that even if they CAN, living it all the time doesn’t make them happy. They want a balance, they want to ALSO experience their feminine side too.


I am not very big into this masculine/feminine side of things in this manner of which you describe.
And I agree many of them are finding it does not make them happy. I think this view and understanding has been very much downplayed here in America in order to promote the "Party Line." It must be keep hidden and concealed from most Americans.
This is why I state that women want Options. Not necessarily RISKS.

This is also why I state that women as a whole are not going to be interested in keeping, building, and maintaining the systems that keep them comfortable and more leisurely.
I do not as a whole see women flocking to states like Wyoming. There is little there which has been pre made and pre constructed by someone else taking the RISK out of life for these things.
The type of woman who will flock to a place like Wyoming is going to be more of a RISK taker ..more independent and more self sufficient. Not dependent on being a social butterfly to get along or get through the day. I can admire and respect a woman like this.
This is because I am aware that a woman who can function like this is capable of coming to a man for love only ...the very thing so many women who have bought into modern day consumer sales pitching.. .are lamenting.

Love love love love...but no RISK RISK RISK RISK.

The women most of whom I know are not interested in a "Sensitive Man" but instead a man who is sensitive to them and their agenda. There is a difference.

I am going to post this and continue on in a second post as I am running out of characters down at the bottom of the page.

Orangetom



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 10:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Bluesma
 


Continuation of previous post above ..


So we get the system proposing to men to try out the other side of the fence and get to know their feminine side. That is an emotional risk. It means thinking outside the box, stepping out of what you already know and are comfortable with. This fear of being feminized is not being a risk taker ! Trusting another, being dependant upon another, sitting in the passanger seat is difficult to do, and calls for great courage and willingness to take a risk.

So don’t try to rationalize your fear of this risk, of opening your mind outside your box by painting the outside of your comfy known area as evil. It is pathetic.


Now this is interesting Bluesma..interesting to me because what I detect particularly here in the west ..in this consumer oriented social structure is that men are not rewarded for showing their feminine side. They are shown by default that this is the preferred method of male conduct. Even expected..taken for granted that this is how males should be carrying on.
What they learn is that for females it is optional and they are rewarded and recognized for this ..for males it is mandatory and required..even taken for granted that they follow the new template or we will coerce you into it through the media, education, and social clues and cues.

In short what males learn is that they are expendable and disposable commodities to this paradigm. Taken for granted ..even overlooked. And this is now become obvious in the political arena as well here..as Politics itself becomes more and more feminized...in order to acquire votes.

What the thinking male comes to realize..though I believe most cannot vocalize it..is that more is expected of them without more coming back to them. The female now expects more feminine roles from him ..though she is not trying out for his masculine RISK taking roles. She may put on the :"appearance of trying out" but does not actually take them on...verses female "Options."

This what I am describing is indeed Pathetic.

What you are describing is that the natural default setting is her settings...not his. But when RISKS are to be taken he is thrust out to the forefront..to be disposable and expendable. But equality is taking place!! I don't think so.

Little wonder so many males prefer video games/sports to the textbook nagging that takes place so often around these settings.

I have had a number of women come to me when they know I have developed certain skills. They have spent their monies on children, entertainments...lifestyles et al. But when they run into problems to difficult or for which they are not skilled or integrated/knowledgeable..they want me to solve it for them at my expense..my disposability and expendability. Because they cannot afford to pay someone to repair their "lifestyle."
I very seldom do this anymore. Not interested in this kind of disposability and expendability.

If they can multi task..they can solve these problems too. Most of them I have found ...have spent their monies and time on Options and have no resources on which to draw. Hence they want to come to me for solutions.
I call this ...working their way through the food chain. They want quick and easy solutions without RISK. No thanks.

However ..today's feminized males do much the same thing. I was appalled to see a fellow I know ..his grown child tell him to fix the child's car and when he needed it fixed. The kid had a cigarette in his mouth while he was telling his father the schedule...when he needed the car back.
My reasoning tells me that if a male can afford a cigarette he can afford to get his car fixed and pay for it or do it himself. Same for a female.
This father was so feminized...that he fixed the car for his grown child. The child was high maintenance and remains so to this day.

I am not saying that a father not love his child. I am however saying that if a father loves his child he prepares the child for the day the father or mother is no longer around to fix or "Flash dance " the child ..through life.
Teaching a child "No" and to be self sufficient is also Loving your child...contrary to modern consumer oriented dogmas. Breast feeding a child into adulthood is very destructive both to the child and to the parent.
It also sometimes makes the children take from their own children's mouths as well as their parent's mouths to sustain a lifestyle. And this is noticeable among many adults today. This too is high maintenance.

I don't have a problem doing traditional female work. I've done if for most of my life. I just don't see the females of this country doing this, taking on traditional male work/RISKS, no matter what the media and education tries to portray. All I have to do is look around me and take stock to see it.

Thanks,
Orangetom

edit on 14-10-2011 by orangetom1999 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 03:24 AM
link   
reply to post by orangetom1999
 

I am not totally sure that I have understood all your points, though I would like to. So I’ll kind of bounce back to you what I grasped and you can correct me where it is necessary, and disregard my responses to that which I have misunderstood.

I do not get your association with instant gratification and the emergence of more women in the roles more traditionally male oriented. The most I can see in that is that in the more public and traditionally male occupations one gets higher pay and recognition of value and respect quicker..... whereas being a successful mother, for example, gets no direct pay check which validates their work, and no acknowledgment for their success until the child has become an adult. Sometimes that chain of effect is never acknowledged at all by the outside world.
The job of raising and educating a child gives only long term compensation and mostly only through personal validation (with ones own conscience, rather than public recognition from the system).

But this is the nature of those jobs...... and perhaps you could say that some women may have wanted to share in that immediate gratification and validation that men were already enjoying. So if immediate gratification is wrong, why was it okay when men were the majority going after it and getting it ?

I also do not see the previous feminist movement as only offering women more options, at least not as it was practiced. The headlines proclaimed more options (just as the current movement claims to offer men) but my mother repeated one lesson to me over and over – « Whatever you do, do NOT become a housewife ! » You MUST have a career outside the home, and anything else is a total failure. I did not get any education that offered me the option of a traditionally female occupation.

Boys today may be getting a similar message - you MUST practice housework and childrearing, and failure to do so is unacceptable. This is the same sort of pressure we girls got in the 70’s, just the other way around.

And on risks, again, I do not see this lack of risk you are describing. Perhaps it is because I am not exposed to these types of women, not being one myself. Even now, my girlfriends in the US are mostly in the midwest (our horse passion being the link) and are hunters, raising cattle, growing their own food, repairing their own barns and fences, running businesses in their rural towns. –And taking their mothering job very seriously. For them being maternal is NOT about doing things for another- it is the process of making an independant individual out of a dependant child.

-This point is one I have noticed is rather specifically twisted in intellectual and urban americans- that being « maternal » is nurturing and serving appetites and needs. That, I believe is an idea that was pushed forward to discredit the job. Being maternal is being tough and having a mind which foresees future effects and works toward them in progressive steps, with organization, creativity and reason. NOT being a selfless giver creating a dependant individual.

One of the biggest risks is love- ask most men afraid of trusting and opening to another. I don’t buy at all the claim that love and risk are separate and risk of so much MORE value. That is the excuse of men afraid of the emotional risk love entails. Love is risk, but it is a different kind of risk. Men feel much more comfortable with physical risks because they have more physical strength, women feel more comfortable with emotional risk because they have more emotional strength.

But really, facing risks is stepping into the arena that isn’t your natural forté, and where you don’t have the odds in your favor.




« In short what males learn is that they are expendable and disposable commodities to this paradigm. »


That is simply them experiencing what it is like to be on the « other side ». The traditional female roles (I am refering to the roles which are most often carried out by women all over the globe in most countries) are OUTSIDE « the system ». They create and construct within the interior, within the home and family, within the smaller community, and you are your own boss. You do not get pay, validation, or acknowledgement for your successes from the system outside.
You evaluate your progress and adjust, you compare and study the choices and results of your collegues to help you plan your own, you discipline and guide yourself.

You pat yourself on the back, your partner may appreciate the work you do for him, for his children, your kids may appreciate many years down the road, you have your neighbor appreciate what you did for them.
But for the official society, you get no awards, no pay check, no guidance or control. You are officially expendable and disposable.

Unofficially, by those closest to you who know you, you may be valuable beyond any other outside influence, and an intimate, deeper value exists. You must give up your attachment to the superficial, immediate gratification, dependance on exterior validation and guidance.

This is what it is like on the other side guys ! It always has been !
When you’re on this side of the fence,. You are your own boss- for real this time. You judge your performance on how your kids turn out, on whether your husband and kids are independant, dynamic, healthy and constructive.... or whether they are dependant, lazy, obese and destructive. THEY are the products of your work.

Just as you say women may not be (in the environment you are in) appreciating the systems and products of traditional mens roles, many men also do not appreciate the the products of the traditional womens work- that is- people.



posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 03:54 AM
link   
A second thought came to me-

I am finding myself thinking that with all the pressure that apparently exists for men to develop their "feminine side" and take up more traditional feminine roles, perhaps they need some guidance or aid in that?

The idea that being "maternal" is only about selfless giving and creation of dependance is a total crock of crap.
Doing that causes a person to become depressed, void of self respect and with low self image, and needing quick and easy forms of distraction and fulfilment like a person with low blood sugar craves sweets.

Being maternal is like being a trainer- your own self discipline must be developed, in order to have your creations (the people, the children in your charge) reflect that same discipline eventually.

I can't help but use for metaphor the discipline I am familiar with- animal training- because it reflects similar principles. When you train an animal to be a constructive being that works with humans, independance is the goal.
When you train a dog to gather sheep, or when you train a horse to work cattle, that is the goal. I'm into "cutting", in which you train a horse to know how to cut out a cow or calf from a herd and separate it. A cutting horse knows how to see what needs to be done, with whom and how- and does it all alone. In a cutting competition, you are not allowed to direct or guide your horse. The product of your years of work with that horse is a horse that analyzes, comprehends and acts, all alone.

That is what childrearing is all about. And yes, you begin by guiding them and showing them, and then you progressively set up situations in which you ask them to respond themself, and the tasks gain in complexity.
It is long hard work that takes analyzation, reason, comprehension and empathy of your student (in order to adjust the lessons accordingly) and long term vision of goals.

It means demanding results and service in return for your guidance, protection, and the survival essentials you provide. It is far from being selfless givers, it is far from just feeding their base desires and appetites, and way, way, far from keeping them dependant!

Even in housekeeping, the job does not entail doing everything for everyone else- it is a job of management and engineering. Delegating and organizing- not being a servant.

The men that are falling into the traps of immediate gratification and comfort may only be doing so because they have been going about their attempts to do maternalization all wrong. They may have a faulty understanding of what is the goal in doing things like housekeeping and childrearing, in social bonding. This is just the beginning of the process, they may make progress and learn to get up on those horses and "pull themselves up by the bootstraps" as the process continues. I wouldn't panic and run out so fast on the whole experience. Just keep working on it.



posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 07:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Bluesma
 


Your a sexist bigot. Why not look into the war on boy's and how the AAUW intentionally lied in the early 90's about the "girl crisis" that caused a very real boy crisis when congress spent hundreds of millions in retooling the educational system to be pro girl and anti boy. Heck look at all the BS hate rhetoric of the last two decades: "Boy's are stupid throw rocks at them".

The women's rights movement is a BS sham. Women never fought for equality, they fought for supremacy and the right to enslave males.

I suggest you google the MGTOW movement. Then again bigots like you are immune to the truth, anything that would disrupt your sociopathic world view you shrug off.

P.S you psycho: Males have always been the disposable gender. It isn't because males are taking on more "feminine gender roles", it is the nature of the oppressive western Nordic Caucasian Matriarchy. Look at all the young men who died on the Titanic, drafted to fight in the first world war.

Women don't know the meaning of oppression. How many women died in the coal mines? The west is coming to an abrupt end soon as no young men of worth are willing to defend it anymore.

MGTOW 4 Life!

P.S
Feminism is nothing but a Female Supremacist hate movement. If it isn't a hate movement name 1 feminist study that has been peer reviewed and hasn't been found to be an outright lie, distortion or in general debunked.

The traditionalist noose is tightening, granted traditionalist's are just as big man-haters as feminist's, but it will be amusing to see what is going to happen next as traditionalist's begin to accelerate their pogrom in fear of a male revolt in the face the outright female supremacist undertones of our society.

And to make things even more amusing, every day that goes by older white knights die off and mangina's like you get converted to the cause. Soon, very soon, men will be able to finally break the millennium old chains of the Nordic Caucasian Matriarchy.

P.S

White women were responsible for "White supremacy type racism". Google it. Google how White women were jealous that White men where willing to marry any woman regardless of race. White women wouldn't have that and especially White British women pushed for laws outlawing marriage between races and the persecution of minorities. Look up how British women gathered up lesser British women to be sent to the colonies to prevent British men from marrying local non British women(and backed up their desire with stiff law's).

Today such ignorance manifest's as women get upset when men marry foreign wives(Look up Tyra banks show how she and her viewer base get upset that "their men" are marrying foreign women).


edit on 18-10-2011 by korathin because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 08:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by korathin
reply to post by Bluesma
 


Your a sexist bigot.


I am not. Get your head out of your ass.
I am not a supporter of the feminist movement, and I think you are being irrational.
I felt the feminist movement did nothing to support femininity, I think it had the opposite effect- pushing forward an agenda of making women valuable only if they could be like men and compete with men in masculine pursuits- in other words, being women and having feminine strengths is worthless. (hence the de-valuation of maternalization into "selfless service to the base appetites" which it has never been and never will be).

I think the current (opposite) movement is similar in action and false concepts.

My point was that bull# is always being offered by the "system" and it's agenda, in one way or another- the wind changes direction from time to time, but always makes walking your own individual path more difficult.

But you can use those winds to your advantage if you choose to just learn a bit from them while they blow one way or the other, like a sailor- the media is on a rampage to make women act like men? Well then go ahead, women and learn what it is like for men! That will be useful in comprehending your male partners, friends and family!

Your current media is pushing for men to act like women? Well then go ahead men and learn what it is like for women! It will aid you later in comprehending your female partners, friends, and family!

You are not under anyone elses power, and nothing the media pushes forward needs to be seen as a such a big threat- keep your head on, manouver in whatever direction you want, taking into account the current trends, but not being completely manipulated by them.

I have made no claim, in any of my posts, of women being victims. I HAVE made the claim that there is an interesting facet to many traditional female roles which does not include having officially acknowledged praise or statute from the system- and it has a more meaningful, deeper, and personal type of reward instead. That is not being a victim- that is simply experiencing a different kind of value.

I don't see the relevance in the pairing of men with foriegn women- my husband is of a different nationality than I, and I came to his country to live. White men act just as objectionable in some circles, of white women pairing with men of others colors or nationalities! This is very evident in the efforts made in the US early on, as well as places like India, where colonization of whites made evident a very lopsided value system- in which it was more acceptable socially for a white man to bed or marry a darker female, but it was unacceptable for a white woman to bed or marry or a darker man!
Such stupid predjudices always exist somewhere! So what? Is that an excuse for you too, to act hateful and pit one (sex or race) against the other too??
There is only a war of the sexes for you if you choose to have it.


edit on 18-10-2011 by Bluesma because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 09:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by korathin
reply to post by Bluesma
 



P.S you psycho: Males have always been the disposable gender. It isn't because males are taking on more "feminine gender roles", it is the nature of the oppressive western Nordic Caucasian Matriarchy. Look at all the young men who died on the Titanic, drafted to fight in the first world war.

Women don't know the meaning of oppression. How many women died in the coal mines? The west is coming to an abrupt end soon as no young men of worth are willing to defend it anymore.


Name calling.... how old are you anyway?

I guess you can CHOOSE to look at the physical risk taking you describe as proof that men are/were considered invaluable or disposable. Or you could choose to look at it as orangetom here does- as proof that men are more apt and couragious at facing physical risks than women.
I haven't found evidence of the limitation upon females for fighting or performing physically difficult tasks as being one women put in place. It has more often been MEN who made the choices to eliminate women as potential soldiers or manual workers such as mining.

I am not completely ignorant of the basic facts of the biological differences in males and females, and that men will have more stamina and strength then women, and so this discrepency may be justified no matter WHO pushed forward that.

My point before was that soldiers get medals, and memorials in their name, even post mortem, for their risks.
Mothers who die in childbirth, or in the rice field, trying to feed and support her family, do not.

That does not mean they are oppressed. It means their roles were gaining different sorts of rewards- the men working towards public acknowledgement, the woman towards personal acknowledgement. And these two types of reward are ultimately equal but different.



posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 10:32 AM
link   
Women are complete idiots. They are not smarter than men, society is just propping them up because the Feminists have a lot of power.



posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 12:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by sliceNodice
Women are complete idiots. They are not smarter than men, society is just propping them up because the Feminists have a lot of power.


There are just as many idiotic men as there are idiotic women.
That's no excuse to lean back on being one yourself.
Society hasn't propped women up as being less idiotic than men, in my opinion, it has only pushed forward as desireable many traditionally female dominated roles lately, just as it once pushed forward many traditionally masculine dominated roles in the past.
The media places focus on one or the other alternatively, but that doesn't mean either is ultimately more important than the other. Think for yourself and don't let yourself be swayed by it's changes in focus.



edit on 18-10-2011 by Bluesma because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 08:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Bluesma
 


Bluesma,

What you describe here happens to males as well..not just to females.


The most I can see in that is that in the more public and traditionally male occupations one gets higher pay and recognition of value and respect quicker..... whereas being a successful mother, for example, gets no direct pay check which validates their work, and no acknowledgment for their success until the child has become an adult. Sometimes that chain of effect is never acknowledged at all by the outside world.


While this may happen to men it is not the end result that it it cracked up to be. Women are deceiving themselves here and especially the womens movements. A mans risk taking in these arenas which gaurantee him success in the workplace does not gaurantee him success on the home front. OFten it is exactly the opposite..he is isolated from emotions on the homefront. This is seldom defined by women or even the men themselves. The things which make him successful..the disciplines at work often make him unsuccessful in love and affection at home.
He often finds himself coming in second, third or further place down the pecking order at home..even behind the dog while everyone and everything else gets priority. But he gets second third or further down the line place but must bring home first fruits.

Hardly ever is this recognized by the very ones in whom he has invested so much .

I believe that women who discover this pattern for themselves when taking on what they claim are "Male " roles..this is one of the sources or reasons of why they find themselves unhappy with it.

When it happens to women there is a whole social network and media et al..to make sure it gets posted and published..but for males there is no such social outlet or network. The males are invisible in their concerns in this arena. It is a big deal when it happens to the female..but the male is unseen and unrecognized in this arena. Not rewarded..not recognized. But if he slacks up on the "Good Providing" it wont take long for him to be recognized by one means or another.

Women dont necessarily want a "sensitive man" they want a man who is sensitive to them..and also the children.


The job of raising and educating a child gives only long term compensation and mostly only through personal validation (with ones own conscience, rather than public recognition from the system).


This is not just an viewpoint of women..but of men too. But the mens role is hardly ever seen or known.


But this is the nature of those jobs...... and perhaps you could say that some women may have wanted to share in that immediate gratification and validation that men were already enjoying. So if immediate gratification is wrong, why was it okay when men were the majority going after it and getting it ?


Once again Bluesma..when many women find out the cost to themselves of these jobs that they think is so glorious to men..they often try to find jobs which suit their personalities..ie ...options. Female social beliefs and thinking..ie..options. This can be done by and for themselves..or through getting up with a man who will provide enough security that she can sellect a job which is preferable to her social view..ie..options. Preferably before the biology runs out and it strikes midnight Cinderella. In short she can go where the status is ..not where the money is as do alot of men or males.


I also do not see the previous feminist movement as only offering women more options, at least not as it was practiced.


Agree with you here Bluesma. The movement offered many women false promises..even women who went to college. It may have gotten them better jobs..better pay but not happiness. Particularly as they grew olde alone.


Boys today may be getting a similar message - you MUST practice housework and childrearing, and failure to do so is unacceptable. This is the same sort of pressure we girls got in the 70’s, just the other way around.


This is baloney to me Bluesma. I was raised with three other siblings. I learned to do all this before I left the nest. I can sew, cook, clean and do all of these things. I do not come to a woman for these things for which I can do for myself. Todays high maintenance males ..many of them cannot or do not do these things. Many of them I have seen are pigs..the females too.

However..I do not find women as a whole coming to me to relieve me of my traditionally male chores or labors which is the point I was making. I am expected to do many of their chores and also my own. Particularly if great RISK is involved in it.

By the way..I agree with you ..that a woman and male both should teach their children in the direction of cutting the chord..not depending on it...forever.

More to come



posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 09:06 PM
link   
more Bluesma,


-This point is one I have noticed is rather specifically twisted in intellectual and urban americans- that being « maternal » is nurturing and serving appetites and needs. That, I believe is an idea that was pushed forward to discredit the job. Being maternal is being tough and having a mind which foresees future effects and works toward them in progressive steps, with organization, creativity and reason. NOT being a selfless giver creating a dependant individual.


Agree here again Bluesma..are we agreeing entirely to much here???

A good mother and father also know how to apply the word.."No." They also know how to carefully apply the concept of weaning a child off the breast in many many categories. I am not against " Tough Love " as the olde folks called it. I dont believe in unconditional love. I believe in conditions. Not only on each other but the children too.
I know to many women who have children they love but never taught them to even make a bed or wash their own clothes. They did it all for them. I dont call this loving their children. I call this making them dependent. But that is the way I think and make no apologies for it.
When a child leaves the nest he/she should know how to take care of certain basics for themselves..not just live in what I call the "fast food lane."


One of the biggest risks is love- ask most men afraid of trusting and opening to another. I don’t buy at all the claim that love and risk are separate and risk of so much MORE value. That is the excuse of men afraid of the emotional risk love entails. Love is risk, but it is a different kind of risk. Men feel much more comfortable with physical risks because they have more physical strength, women feel more comfortable with emotional risk because they have more emotional strength.


Love is indeed RISK and vulnurability. However I dont buy the concept of love which so many women take for granted is normal and even entitled.
I disagree with your concept that men feel more comfortable with physical risks. Men feel this way because most of them are capable of taking care of their physical needs for themselves through labor.

What a knowledgeable man comes to a woman for is Peace..not just Piece. What I have discerned is that so few of today's educated women know this concept. What is also pathetic is that so few males know it as well. They too have been cheaply merchandized in this arena.

Of the women you know..how many of them even understand this concept. HOw many of the urban women of today understand this in lieu of the ..'Women of this or that country or city" I tried to watch some of these programs and quickly switched the channel. It was pitiful in its merchandizing plots. Same with this program called "Sex and the City."
Peace is the commodity for which a knowing man comes to a woman..not Piece.
It is not difficult today to get a woman to undress..pardon the crudity. It is not a rare or valuable commodity in the marketplace. Particularly when one understands the concept of competition among women.
So many males do not undestand this concept and not only the males but the females as well.

I have taught this concept to several young men and many have shut their women right up when the women try to use the olde line about "You come to me for only one thing." Most have never heard or experienced a man be able to defend this type of accusation.

A woman understands the concept of Peace she can put a man on a drug for which he never wants to get off it.
But so many women try to put a man on any and everything else..every cheap merchandizable substitute. Which is why so many women have to invest in renewable biology instead of real life skills. And they are doing this at younger and younger ages...because of perceived merchandizable RISKS...Vulnurabilities.
They are in their own way doing the same stupid and patheticness of which they accuse the males.


But really, facing risks is stepping into the arena that isn’t your natural forté, and where you don’t have the odds in your favor.


You need to think this through carefully. Males even today are employed in almost all of the death occupations. Males have a higher mortality rate in all categories than females. Are you telling me that there are odds in favor of the male today?? In every category ..or only in traditionally female categories??
There is no more loss of power in life/vulnurability..than loss of life and limb. Are you thinking this through??
How many women do you know or think about today who willingly face a career in these death occupations?? Or do they quickly go for the "Options??"

I know very few. Of the women I know who do ..I respect them..for what they do. but most of them are not supporting a male from their career earnings. They are not interested in this.

continued.



posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 09:22 PM
link   
Bluesma,


But for the official society, you get no awards, no pay check, no guidance or control. You are officially expendable and disposable.


Pardon my crudity here Bluesma..but I couldn't give two hoots what society wants or thinks. I have found most of it to be flatulence. Some of it even rabid flatulence which does not make good nonsense. And as more people go out of work due to economic conditions this is going to wax worse between women and men until they learn to disregard what the whoremasters of society are attempting to do..and learn to think for themselves. Whore everyone out ...male and female both society will. Society likes to think this enlightened. I dont think so.



This is what it is like on the other side guys ! It always has been !
When you’re on this side of the fence,. You are your own boss- for real this time. You judge your performance on how your kids turn out, on whether your husband and kids are independant, dynamic, healthy and constructive.... or whether they are dependant, lazy, obese and destructive. THEY are the products of your work.


Agree with what is quoted of you here Bluesma. There was a time when people knew this of themselves. They did not need a society/social "Expert" to tell or teach them this.


Just as you say women may not be (in the environment you are in) appreciating the systems and products of traditional mens roles, many men also do not appreciate the the products of the traditional womens work- that is- people.


I appreciate the products of a traditional woman when I can find one and they are becoming an endangered species now days. A woman who knows about Peace verses so many who know only or mostly Piece.

I also want to make a point about nurturing. A man may not do "nurturing " in the manner that does a woman..but make no mistake..it is nurturing. It is also teaching ones children to survive when the parents are no longer there to pick them up and wipe off their bottoms so to speak. Even tough love is nurturing.

For I know now..that my parents both loved me by giving me certain skills to make it on my own. They did not spoil me as did other parents their children. For there were four of us. We never went hungry but often did not have what we kids would like to have had.
I am blessed to still have both parents..but they taught me to do with very little..I call this the law of the minimum. To do with very little or do without.

But they taught me the rudiments of getting back up and keep going...learning to sometimes think further than what was obvious..what was seen by the physical eyes.

From my Father I learned certain physical skills..mechanics and some electrical, electronics. From my mother I learned to love reading. The two make for a very powerful combination when used correctly.

Would that I had a better education than that which I currently possess. But I dont think I would have gotten along well with todays crop of professors.

Well..this has gone on long enough. I thank you for your very considered responses. Also for standing your ground even among the "Wildlife " out here.

No matter what our personal beliefs and passions...civility never goes out of style to those who know of it's merits.

My thanks and respect,
Orangetom

edit on 18-10-2011 by orangetom1999 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 02:47 AM
link   
Originally posted by orangetom1999



Women are deceiving themselves here and especially the womens movements. A mans risk taking in these arenas which gaurantee him success in the workplace does not gaurantee him success on the home front. OFten it is exactly the opposite..he is isolated from emotions on the homefront. This is seldom defined by women or even the men themselves. The things which make him successful..the disciplines at work often make him unsuccessful in love and affection at home.

I believe that women who discover this pattern for themselves when taking on what they claim are "Male " roles..this is one of the sources or reasons of why they find themselves unhappy with it.


We are in agreement here. That is why my thinking is that it might be constructive for women to have tried this, stepped into the shoes of the men for a while, and then better be able to understand and empathize with their men.




When it happens to women there is a whole social network and media et al..to make sure it gets posted and published..but for males there is no such social outlet or network.


I have not percieved this, but then I am in another country where thigns are different, and there may be trends in the US recently that I am not aware of. What I do know is that back in the fifties, no media was sympathetic at all to womens situations of this type. Being selfless martyrs was widely believed to be a womans calling and what she felt best doing. .....so the children of those martyrs reacted by pushing the opposite way and became radical feminists, not wanting to live like their mothers did. Those baby boomers may still be focusing on that and part of them thinking that "too bad, now it's the mens turn to experience that".
Of course I think it is irrational, it is an explanation not an excuse, for the behavior. Being reactive to extremes by becoming an extremist on the opposing side is always a bit irrational.




Women dont necessarily want a "sensitive man" they want a man who is sensitive to them..and also the children.

Exactly. A man who is sensitive to the needs of their family can be a effective parent and partner, a man that just can't say no to anyone because they are so sensitive risks letting predators get their family and offspring- failing as a protector. The balance of being sensitive, but not too much is difficult to learn, but can be, with time. Just as men want a female partner that is sensitive to their needs, but not so sensitive they can’t say no to other men who wish to mate with them, or to predator people who are a threat to the home and offspring


The job of raising and educating a child gives only long term compensation and mostly only through personal validation (with ones own conscience, rather than public recognition from the system).



This is not just an viewpoint of women..but of men too. But the mens role is hardly ever seen or known.


I respectfully Disagree. In talking of traditional mens roles, I’m refering to jobs on the exterior of the home, in which a pay check is, in itself, public recognition of work they did. Even the most low paying jobs which recieve the least amount of social standing still get the acknowledgement of work through a pay check, which a household engineer and child care taker does not.






Once again Bluesma..when many women find out the cost to themselves of these jobs that they think is so glorious to men..they often try to find jobs which suit their personalities..ie ...options. Female social beliefs and thinking..ie..options. This can be done by and for themselves..or through getting up with a man who will provide enough security that she can sellect a job which is preferable to her social view..ie..options. Preferably before the biology runs out and it strikes midnight Cinderella. In short she can go where the status is ..not where the money is as do alot of men or males.


I do not at all see this as true. Women have to take whatever they can to make money and support their family. I had to work as a hairstylist for a while because it was urgent (you might call that a female type activity, but I HATED it. I am not into that), I also had to work for three years in a mechanics garage and gas station, which I also hated and was paid minimum wage. I had a husband at that point, who had a decent job himself, but that did not get ME a job of any higher level than anyone else, or a wider set of options !



This is baloney to me Bluesma. I was raised with three other siblings. I learned to do all this before I left the nest. I can sew, cook, clean and do all of these things. I do not come to a woman for these things for which I can do for myself. Todays high maintenance males ..many of them cannot or do not do these things. Many of them I have seen are pigs..the females too. [ /quote]

Okay, if you learned all these things of your own volition (not having anyone else motivate you to) and it is not the norm where you are, then just what is this complaint of feminization of men ?? Where is it ? You’ve had no pressure to enter traditional female roles, and say no other men are either.... so what do you call feminization ? You have refered to things like shopping and immediate gratification- did you mean to say that that is « feminine » ??? If so, then I can truly say that the Americans have lost sight of what being feminine IS. This is not a crisis of men being feminized, this si purely a crisis of a society worshipping mass consumption and encouraging all sexes to partake.




However..I do not find women as a whole coming to me to relieve me of my traditionally male chores or labors which is the point I was making. I am expected to do many of their chores and also my own. Particularly if great RISK is involved in it.


Then I find this interesting to note, in face with the men here complaining that women have flooded the job market and are making less jobs for men. Where I am, women do both working outside the home and all home organization (cleaning, cooking, etc.). It is different though. I have been hearing that it is still the case in the US, but perhaps that was wrong. I recently read a stat that in homes where the male doesn’t work and the female does, she still does 75% of the housework. I don’t have the source for that, maybe I should look into it.

But yeah.... I think the feminist movement of the 70’s took over the homes by getting the women out of it, and instead of people getting proper maternal education (learning to be self sufficient, healthy, and balanced) they missed that and instead were taught to be mass consumers by the system which took over their upraising.

I will read your other post as soon as possible, I’ve got to run out for a minute. But I am really enjoying the discussion and reading your point of view.
edit on 19-10-2011 by Bluesma because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 06:21 AM
link   
Originally posted by orangetom1999



A good mother and father also know how to apply the word.."No." They also know how to carefully apply the concept of weaning a child off the breast in many many categories. I am not against " Tough Love " as the olde folks called it. I dont believe in unconditional love. I believe in conditions. Not only on each other but the children too.


I agree. What I find troubling is that selfless and unlimited giving has recently been called « maternalization » way too often in our culture- indicating that being maternal is doing that. This gives a bad message to mothers, takes away the power and responsibility of that role, and gives them a bad rap altogether.

We end up with two different sorts of mothers- the ones that either did everything for them, or did nothing for them. It is the typical ' easy way out’ of splitting things into black and white extremes to avoid the difficult work of integration. A progressive plan of education, such as :

1-make the bed while the child watches
2-then have the child participate with you in making the bed
3-have the child make the bed while you watch and give feedback
4-have the child do the bed making alone, with you not present

is harder to carry out then to do it yourself, or as soon as the child is physically capable, to expect them to do it alone. Of course they don’t learn to do it that way, they just become neurotic from being left with expectations and no education. Their only solution becomes buy things or get someone else to do it for them.



Love is indeed RISK and vulnurability. However I dont buy the concept of love which so many women take for granted is normal and even entitled.

I am not sure what you mean by « entitled ». You might have to elaborate if you’d like me to better comprehend.


I disagree with your concept that men feel more comfortable with physical risks. Men feel this way because most of them are capable of taking care of their physical needs for themselves through labor.

Well, in a sense you did agree ! You re-stated what I said in different words. Only that I think women are also capable of taking care of their emotional needs through communication, so feel perfectly capable of surviving emotionally if a risk taken fails. If the man she has trusted fails to live up to his promises or lies about his feelings for her, then she is very capable fo finding social interaction, and affection with another rather easily.



What a knowledgeable man comes to a woman for is Peace..not just Piece. What I have discerned is that so few of today's educated women know this concept. What is also pathetic is that so few males know it as well. They too have been cheaply merchandized in this arena.

Of the women you know..how many of them even understand this concept. HOw many of the urban women of today understand this in lieu of the ..'Women of this or that country or city" I tried to watch some of these programs and quickly switched the channel. It was pitiful in its merchandizing plots. Same with this program called "Sex and the City."
Peace is the commodity for which a knowing man comes to a woman..not Piece.
It is not difficult today to get a woman to undress..pardon the crudity. It is not a rare or valuable commodity in the marketplace. Particularly when one understands the concept of competition among women.
So many males do not undestand this concept and not only the males but the females as well.


Well, I am hesitant to respond with my first thoughts because I am not confident that I have totally understood what you mean to say, but if that is the case, you can say so.... so I’ll take the risk. I think part of it is that many women, with the instinct of looking for a good provider/protector, are looking for ambitious men. Ambitious men are NOT looking for peace. They are attracted to gain and conquer. The alphas get bored with « peace ». They are attracted to challenge, so find challenging women with high expectations exciting. It motivates them to be more, do more, and discover their strengths and abilities more.
Non-alphas become overwhelmed with challenge, excited by gain, but overwhelmed by the responsibility that comes with each gain in power.
This is an instinct of wooing that makes sense- at the beginning of a relationship.




I have taught this concept to several young men and many have shut their women right up when the women try to use the olde line about "You come to me for only one thing." Most have never heard or experienced a man be able to defend this type of accusation.


Ick. That is the part of the current american culture I really find distasteful- the idea that women are only valued for sex. In France it is common belief that a wife provides a sense of security and safety at home for him, which becomes the strongest link they have through time. Outside is where the challenges, risks, and competition are faced- at home they get security, safety, understanding, guidance, and .....as you say, Peace.

But we have a problem with the concept of a man getting that sort of « maternalization »- no man wants to be « mommied » because it is not socially acceptable in the US.
It more acceptable to claim to be only sexually driven, therefore more "manly".


But really, facing risks is stepping into the arena that isn’t your natural forté, and where you don’t have the odds in your favor.
You need to think this through carefully. Males even today are employed in almost all of the death occupations. Males have a higher mortality rate in all categories than females. Are you telling me that there are odds in favor of the male today?? In every category ..or only in traditionally female categories??



I am saying exactly what you wrote earlier-
« Men feel this way because most of them are capable of taking care of their physical needs for themselves through labor. »
and what I said, « Women are more capable of taking care of their emotional needs for themselves through communication. »
So each takes risks that they feel they have better odds in.



There is no more loss of power in life/vulnurability..than loss of life and limb. Are you thinking this through??
How many women do you know or think about today who willingly face a career in these death occupations?? Or do they quickly go for the "Options??"


Men may take more physical risks, that doesn’t mean they are always victorious in those risks. I do think that you are right that many women take less risks with their life, and for various reasons, like being aware of the impact their death would have upon others, like children.

But how many men are willing to love again and again, even after being badly hurt or having their heart broken ? I think they hesitate and in some cases refuse to take that risk. Being vulnerable to another person is something many men will refuse to the point of choosing a mortally threatening act instead !
This is why the sex without love thing becomes their preference in some cases- fun without risk.




I know very few. Of the women I know who do ..I respect them..for what they do. but most of them are not supporting a male from their career earnings. They are not interested in this.


In MOST of the couples I know, the woman is the main earner for the family. But I am in a different country, and the values are different. Men are not at all embarrassed when they say they need to talk each decision over with their wife first, calling her « the boss », or when the gas company calls and immediately asks to speak to the wife. They are not embarrassed to be driving the fancy sports car their wife bought them, while they themselves only have a part time job as a janitor.
What are your first reactions to those things ? Are they like mine were ? Disgust ? What friggin ‘ pussies ? (even that wording alone alerted me to my own conditioned american sexism !)

I suspect that the american men play a part in women not taking the responsibilities that go with the power without even being aware they are ! They don’t want to be unmanly and acknowledge her power, their need for emotional support and security, their need for guidance and private leadership...... so how can a woman step into those roles and responsibilities ? If society and their own partner reject them?

edit on 19-10-2011 by Bluesma because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 19 2011 @ 08:14 AM
link   
Originally posted by orangetom1999




Pardon my crudity here Bluesma..but I couldn't give two hoots what society wants or thinks. I have found most of it to be flatulence. Some of it even rabid flatulence which does not make good nonsense.


Personally, I don’t feel strongly either way about that. Sometimes public recognition is nice and even useful, sometimes it is completely worthless and irrelevent- all depending upon the individuals goals, intents, and preferences. I don’t feel it is wrong to go after public recognition and reward, nor wrong to go after private recognition and reward. Serving the collective is as honorable as serving the individual, and ultimately they are interdependant (the individual benefits from the good of the collective, the collective benefits from the good of the individual)

I observe that in our culture, however, public recognition and reward is generally acknowledged more often than private- which is why I wish to just suggest to those unaware of the benefits to private recognition and reward that it is another option and experience with it’s benefits and rewards too.
Even if the society considers you worthless (pays you no money, gives you no job title, no acknowledgement) having your family and friends value and appreciate you is very fulfilling too. It is not the end of the world if « the system » doesn’t embrace you,

.

There was a time when people knew this of themselves. They did not need a society/social "Expert" to tell or teach them this.

Yes, I agree. But we became very very entrenched in our desire to experience « individuality » and individual freedom, to the point that many of the social bonds of a community collapsed. People went to a shrink instead fo talked to their neighbor, a village square ceased to be a place were people congrated outside and communicated with each other. We stay in our cars, in our houses, in our work place, and buy services and products. That is why I think it is important for us non-rpofessionals to chat with others and share our experiences with each other !


I also want to make a point about nurturing. A man may not do "nurturing " in the manner that does a woman..but make no mistake..it is nurturing. It is also teaching ones children to survive when the parents are no longer there to pick them up and wipe off their bottoms so to speak. Even tough love is nurturing.

But see, I don’t see that as a male kind of nurturing anymore (i used to share that american idea of only paternalization as that which challenges, commands and is tough) in some other countries that is what nurturing IS- it is nurturing the abilities of independance.Where did this idea come from that nurture means only providing pleasureable experience ? That that is what mothering is ?

It sounds like you had a balanced and beneficial early education. Unfortunately that is not the same for everyone. But I don’t think we stop learning as adults, and that it is still possible to keep learning new ways of thought and being.
I didn’t have the same luck- I was born to two people with a lot of problems, very young, and who both took off when I was 9 and left me to raise my little brother and sister alone..... they were out « finding themselves » and refusing to be tied down by the traps of parenthood, or marriage.
So on the downside, this left me with some difficulty embracing people who refuse to accept their responsibilities under the excuse of « freedom », who make choices they do not follow up on.
It made me very very scared of trusting and leaning on anyone (so being dependant upon my partner in any way was the biggest risk I could take).I jump into physically risky sports, jobs, and activities with no hesitation, but depending on another person ? I’d rather poke a stick in my eye.
Being a housewife for a while was one of the biggest challenges I have ever met in my life. Terrifying.

On the plus side, it taught me to trust in my physical and mental abilities to survive, it taught me the to be responsible and focus on my integrity..... and most of all, keep learning! Keep being open to new experiences to learn more, and increase my experiencial knowledge and skills.
That is all I wish to encourage to others- try it out. If you don’t like it, you can stop, but at least you’ll know exactly WHY you don’t like it and what it is about, instead of talking out your ass about things you have no experience of !
(that's a general "you", not you in particular, by the way!)


Well..this has gone on long enough. I thank you for your very considered responses. Also for standing your ground even among the "Wildlife " out here.
No matter what our personal beliefs and passions...civility never goes out of style to those who know of it's merits.


I am sorry if this was long, I greatly enjoyed the discussion ! There are things we agree on, some we don’t, and that is all fine. It expanded my view in any case. A respectful bow to you, collegue!


edit on 19-10-2011 by Bluesma because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 10:26 AM
link   
nenothtu,



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 was going back and re reading certain pages of this thread and came across this and took a back flip!!

What!!!!! Are you UnAmerican??? You know you should be on the treadmill...worshipping the gods of sports ...on your knees at this altar and also buying all the products dedicated to these Idols and worship services.

What is the matter with you ...you Infidel!!! Un American...that's what you are!!! UnAmerican!!



I am of course being facetious...

I was just a bit taken back to find another who does not worship at this altar nor decorate himself with the trappings of this worship service in these "Hallowed Temples."

Once again I agree with your premise.


Do not misunderstand me here. I am aware that many of these sports peoples have great skills and the marketplace is willing to compensate themselves handsomely for this skill. But not with my monies earned often at great RISKS. I have no desire to worship at this false altar.
I am also aware that for every person who makes it into the big leagues thousands have fallen by the wayside. The competition is fierce.

However ..on the other end...like a light which burns twice as bright ..they will only burn half as long. It is a very costly road down which they travel and must needs be planned and managed carefully. I have no interest in it or the worship of such.

I thought I was about the only one out here with this working philosophy. I am gratified to see another. It can sometimes seem a lonely road out here.

I will be so gratified to see Football season over...however it will be quickly supplanted with NASCAR...Basketball...and a plethora of others along with the Advertising/Tithing services to follow suit.

I just got back from three days of a thing called PIT Training down in Mooresville, North Carolina on the company.

www.5off5on.com...

This is a place where they help train professional pit crews. While it was vey interesting I have no interests in NASCAR nor the worship services around this sport.
The technology I find very interesting along with the ability of the PIT crews to function in a type of ballet and in such a very short time. It is very interesting to see it happen ..live by a well oiled machine working in proper timing and unison. Great teamwork skills are required for this.
I make no plans to become a NASCAR Groupie or attend a race nor buy the very overpriced products and tithe to this group.

What many businesses have done is realize that this is more than just a sport but a model of efficiency for many of them in the outside world. A way of thinking, approaching, and solving problems which they may encounter.

In retrospect is is a type of business model..as in the Orient is the "Book of Five Rings" by Miyamoto Musashi also " The Art of War" by Sun Tzu.
This PIT Place is the American Philosophy or approach to problem solving.

It was an interesting trip and I learned a few things there.

Nonetheless I thought I was about the only square peg in a round hole out here in regards to not worshiping at the altar of the gods of sports. Good to see someone else who gets it.

I too am not competitive in such an manner.

Also ..to the readers as well as yourself..don't misunderstand me. I know the value of sports in teaching one how to take and manage certain RISKS. I am just not into the spotlight that I need to mold myself around such worship. I have mostly been in my private affairs...a lobo...solitary...not very social minded. No need to prove myself. And I don't give two hoots who approves or disapproves of it. Male or Female.

What I do not approve of is women who try to use such knowledge of sports to get me to run touchdowns for them and children at great expense and RISK to me without something of real intrinsic value coming back.
And I have known many women who are or try to be good at this kind of manipulation...substituting their playbook for mine. I catch on to this quickly today.
I have found that "The best years of her life" is not worth the constant RISK taking to run touchdowns for them.

Piece is not a good substitute for Peace.

I think that you of most of the men out here can understand such an concept.

I have also learned by this that Peace is the most valuable commodity a woman can bring to a knowledgeable man. Not Piece.
Unfortunately few men or males know this aspect..thus so too do few women or females in lieu of the fast food lane of life here in America. "High Maintenance.

Thanks,
Orangetom
edit on 24-10-2011 by orangetom1999 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 11:15 AM
link   
reply to post by orangetom1999
 


Bluesma,

As I was saying to nenothtu, I went back and re read several pages. I recalled this from up further on this page.


The most I can see in that is that in the more public and traditionally male occupations one gets higher pay and recognition of value and respect quicker..... whereas being a successful mother, for example, gets no direct pay check which validates their work, and no acknowledgment for their success until the child has become an adult. Sometimes that chain of effect is never acknowledged at all by the outside world.


I decided to link this for you and the other readers out here concerning why men earn more.



www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

This is 1 through 8 of the video of Why Men Earn More.

Hope it helps you as well as other readers out here.


Continuing on...


I posted..


When it happens to women there is a whole social network and media et al..to make sure it gets posted and published..but for males there is no such social outlet or network.


and you replied with


I have not percieved this, but then I am in another country where thigns are different, and there may be trends in the US recently that I am not aware of. What I do know is that back in the fifties, no media was sympathetic at all to womens situations of this type.


You bring up a good point here in regards to the time warp technique used and misused by so many in the women's movements and in the standard predictable M1A replies often found in today's responses. Most males cannot think it through with so much sports conditioning blocking their thinking patterns.

The difference today verses in the 1950 is that merchandisers, advertisers and social thinkers have noted and invested heavily in the concept and understanding that though the female may not earn or RISK for most of the monies/goods ...she controls how most of it is spent...on what ..particularly in big ticket items.

There are so many women on these posts who scream discrimination using the "Burqa Dictum" with the view that no males can see through the hoax..and they are mostly correct. Except that I can see through it based on what I just posted in the above paragraph.

There are a plethora of programs here on television which cater primarily to a female or feminine audience. Flip this house, Trading spaces, New Home buyers, cooking programs..etc etc. The primary audience in these programs is women/females. All of the women in these programs are wearing burkas...and they have absolutely no say as to what goes into these homes or meals. Correct!!??

You see how ridiculous the Burqa Dictum/Victim Dictum is among women today. No other group has so much power and control over the ones they claim to oppress them yet the oppressor be so ignorant and oblivious to this happening to them. No other oppressed group has so much time for television or romance novels or magazines and the products advertised. Once you realize about the market share...it becomes obvious who is ignorant here...it is the males.I don't believe the females are that naturally dumb. They may be subtle but they are not that dumb. Subtlety is not a strong or suit point among many males.

I Know a number of peoples who work or have worked in the auto sales business at one time. They can clearly tell you who is the major decision maker of what kinds of cars are purchased in America and has been for many years. The female. They can also tell you who purchases/pays for the cars and maintains them...insures them et al.

These economic trends of which I speak...you can also bet that the Politicians also know this trend line and by this economic power that the women/females are the ones who's vote they are primarily catering to since they control most of how the monies are spent in this country.

Now what was that about who earns the most monies in this country. It means nothing next to who controls how it is spent. Understand now.

Don't worry ..most males and men are to busy trying to run touchdowns to think this through. Give them some sports, alcohol, and cheerleaders and they are good for another 100,000 miles. And politicians and social thinkers know this.

Female programs and programs to feminize the males have most of the time slots here in prime time America.

continued down on the next post..



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 11:51 AM
link   
There is one channel locally which caters to the male mindset and I find it pitiful. It is a male version of Cosmo Magazine selling mostly sex and sexuality.

I think it is called Spike TV and the program is called "Manswers."

I noted this years ago when someone brought a magazine to work called "Maxim." Asking if I could read it, I opened it up only to figure out it was a male version of Cosmo..minus the quizzes.s Same male product line..overpriced..same advertising format...buy this or be no one. This product will "Flash dance" you through women.
It was just pitiful

Same thing with this network..it is all sex and women who mostly take off their clothes and pose. It is just the male equivalent of drivel to me.

Don't misunderstand me here. I enjoy the female form as much as the next man/male..but not in that kind of setting. I also appreciate a woman or who can do more than take off her clothes and pose. I have little use for such an female if all she can do is strip. And I don't consider them to be women. I think you can understand this concept.


I respectfully Disagree. In talking of traditional mens roles, I’m refering to jobs on the exterior of the home, in which a pay check is, in itself, public recognition of work they did. Even the most low paying jobs which recieve the least amount of social standing still get the acknowledgement of work through a pay check, which a household engineer and child care taker does not.


I disagree with you here...respectfully of course. A males work around the home is also not recognized but often taken for granted. A default setting..no matter how much RISK is involved. Expected..a default setting. He is not rewarded for it. I am referring to both as well. He may often bring home a paycheck but this too is often overlooked in lieu of personal necessities of others and the male often comes in last behind even the dog as I have said in other posts. He may get success at work in earning his paycheck but the skills he learns at work to survive do not translate into success or survival at home..compared to the instant gratification survival of everyone else for whom he takes RISKS at work. Statistics can bear this out as well...but they too are often overlooked in lieu of Political correctness and social engineering politics.

I suspect that women today who are doing this are themselves learning the price they pay for trying to cover both bases. Less emotional satisfaction with their lives. Hence the dissatisfaction of many with the feminist movements. Males have done this for thousands of years but even today have no outlet for their views...and they know politically and economically ..no one wants to hear it....verses getting votes.

And politics is the ultimate feminine occupation. You can take credit for what one has not done and also put blame on others ...without being seen or known.

Males in politics who know how to work the ultimate subtitles/occult are very feminine and also very powerful in manipulation..a necessity in political survival. Because it is a highly competitive and cut throat business.

Now not all males or females operate thus but it is know and one can see it happening if one can think outside today's public education manipulations or dumbing down. The current Libya debacle is textbook of this occult manipulation on the public...as so too was Egypt. Some are saying and thinking that Algeria is soon to follow.


I do not at all see this as true. Women have to take whatever they can to make money and support their family.


You are finding yourself in the same boat as many males and men. But most of the women I know around here choose jobs which better fit their personality and have better conditions than for most males. If they get a job as do most males..they soon find ways to move or migrate to one which better suits their personality ..including migration by marriage. This is a migration seldom taken by males..migration by marriage.


so what do you call feminization


Yes..I call feminization the defining ones self by the things one consumes...physical. I agree ..Americans have lost sight of much ..even who their forefathers were and the RISKs they took. They substitute with gadgets, movies, and television, They have few thoughts and experiences of their own. Even their emotions are now days second hand through movies, television, video games and consumption rates.

The problem with men becoming feminized is that they lose their ability to lead..but instead become followers. They also lose their ability to think through and analyze RISK. They become good consumers..not good men.

It is become so bad here that their women are now leading them..but the women are not willing to take the RISKS. They appear to be doing so..but appearances are deceiving here. What is worse the males are so dumb they don't see it.

Continued...



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 12:05 PM
link   
continued..


This is not a crisis of men being feminized, this si purely a crisis of a society worshipping mass consumption and encouraging all sexes to partake.


One of the things I do on the side is study history..and particularly I look for the influence of Occult religions on history. Because I know that Occult religions have their origins in the Feminine. And if one looks closely you can see the Occult/feminine hand here today in operation...particularly in politics ..which is economics...which is selling the very souls of a people for votes and power.

One of the most deceitful, damaging occult mantras of politics and particularly this administration is "Wealth Redistribution" and "Tax Breaks for the Rich." It is a lie and an outright deception on a public which is not perceptive about all the cards in the deck. I say this because the occult side hidden from people is that "Wealth Redistribution" is not RISK Redistribution." Once one knows to turn the coin over and see the reverse side..it quickly becomes obvious and flatulence.

"Tax breaks for the Rich" This too is flatulence. When government ..any government can get all the monies it wants by borrowing on the deficit....and passing the cost on to everyone else...who is Rich here.??
Government taxes us to prevent us from being able to out spend them in the one economy there is out here. We are their competition in the marketplace for goods and services. This is the occult/feminine side of what they dont want us to see..the other side of the coin.

See how easily it is to see it once you are shown the other side of the coin.
But they dont want it to be seen ...just as they dont want the male to see how the market share is divided up ...to which sex most of it caters ..while screaming victim dictum. They must keep the males dumb and ignorant of just about everything...even as they march them off to their deaths in war..while the women and kids cheer them on.

This is also a definition of insanity.

But if you have been trained heavily in a sports culture of males beating each other up on a playing field.....you will seldom catch on to it.

I am watching the clock and must needs get ready for another schedule...

I will continue later.

Thanks for your patience,

Orangetom



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 13  14  15   >>

log in

join