Men, Who Needs Them?

whitewave
s-media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com...

If there were no men what we do for Darwin Awards?

Caution: personal POV follows. Women don't need men for their wallets, their ability to sire children, for moving the refrigerator on cleaning day or for taking out the garbage. We need men to have manly virtues (courage, honor, righteousness, decency, etc.) and to treat their women well.
Read a book entitled Maximized Manhood that stated the best thing a man can do for his children is to love their mother.
When men start looking at women at cooking, cleaning, beer-fetching sex machines, they can expect to be replaced.

edit on 1-1-2014 by whitewave because: (no reason given)

well..

I can't argue those points either and would certainly agree on your last point. It's perspective & expectations of both genders need a reboot; but it's also the true understanding of the role men should be acting and taking it seriously as well as women.

you encountered some very odd tiny cells that he had shed

Cant do any of that yapping with out that.

Don't worry guys. In a SHTF scenario, 150 years of women's suffrage will go out the window in about 5 minutes. You're safe for a while longer.

Doesn't have to be a SHTF scenario though - just wait until the next time you have to open a jar!

I kid...

biz feen el ah?

LadySkadi
Doesn't have to be a SHTF scenario though - just wait until the next time you have to open a jar!

I kid...

Actually the last time I tried to make some guy feel all manly by asking him to open a jar, he couldn't do it and I've seen him bench press 200#. I really wanted what was in the jar so I used simple science instead of the brawn that never materialized. Little rubber-like pads for offering grip helps immensely for opening jars. That and running hot water over the lid. My refrigerator is too heavy for me to move so I just put wheels on it. Problem solved. When my teen and I tried to wrestle a cast iron stove out of the back of my truck (took 4 men to lift it in there), I quickly realized I needed a male chauvinist but they're just not around when you need them. Finally decided not to be a man about it so I disassembled the stove and the individual parts could be lifted with ease. Re-assembled it and chopped my own wood too.

Yes, we love big strong men but, honestly, we don't really need the muscles (we just LIKE them). As darkelf once said on a similar thread years ago: women don't want equality, we want respect! Amen to that.

reply to post by whitewave
Just being glib - I definately agree with your last sentence...

reply to post by LadySkadi


No problem. There's a book I read a few years ago that talks about the war of the sexes in terms of genetics and says the geneticists were "alarmed" because it looked like the males (Y chromosome) was losing. Not sure if it's the same one that was quoted in this thread.
Because our bodies adapt to survive, it seems that the Y chromosome had come up with a unique defense. It allows for a chemical to be produced that only affects X chromosomes, basically calming females and making them "submissive". IIRC, you have to avoid condom use for the chemical to work but I had to chuckle at nature's ingenuity.
I'll have to look for that book. It's quite informative.

reply to post by SLAYER69


I've been reading ATS for a few years now, just decided to join recently. Thanks though.

SleepyOwl
reply to post by SLAYER69

 

After reading the rest of the comments on this post.... I have to say I can see why some women would be inclined to not be so dependent on men in the future...Women do not exist to make men sandwiches and clean up after them despite what a large majority here obviously think. If you want a maid then hire a maid.

It's funny that you post an article about this and [some] men unknowingly make it blatantly obvious why [some] women would be on board with the idea of not needing men.

Just wanted to acknowledge this post Slayer69 because I often wonder what happened to the good old days as well.

edit on 1-1-2014 by SleepyOwl because: (no reason given)

I am curious... What "good old days" do you come from? The ones I came from my father worked and my mother took care of him, the house, and us kids. Was she ever bothered by it? No, because that WAS her job. It was simply one where she did not have to get dressed and drive somewhere to punch a time clock, but her pay was awesome all the same.

Did she make "sandwiches"? No, she usually made full hot meals complete with side dishes and they were always foods my father loved... A sandwich is easy... I could do a sandwich in my sleep. Does it bother you that someone who wants to share their life with you would ask that you take 2 minutes out of your day to do something for them? Especially considering they did something to better your lives, all damn day.

Now, in my house at current moment, both my husband and I work. So we take turns to a degree... if you can call it "turns" There is no schedule of chores, and of course my husband couldn't see a dirty dish if it were to bite him in the ass.. it would actually have to walk up to him and say "wash me" and even then he might think it was speaking Chinese.

But if I am tired, and I don't think he is too tired, I can ask for his help. If I ask him, out-loud and direct without any subtlety (since this is the only language men do understand) to wash the dishes, or take out the trash, or stop at the store on his way home, he is willing to help without any complaint. I try to be very fair and never ask too much of him.

Men are not similar to women, women see dirt. Men cannot. This is okay, this is something inherited just like men can tell when the car needs fixed and many women cannot provided its still going down the road. The only time I could ever see a man being a problem is if he was never ever willing to help out when asked, and you brought home just as much bacon.. then it could be a problem... but just because you are asked to occasionally make a 2 minute sandwich and grab a "fill in drink of choice" out of the fridge while you are in the kitchen anyway, is not cause for concern.

Men and woman both are made for each other. Men help women just as much as women help men... if the women who think spending a few minutes each day trying to keep their man happy is too much work for them, then it is no wonder the men they encounter don't have enough time to try to keep them happy in return.

All roads go two ways, rather than only one. Knowing this, and knowing men are different than women and how best to interact with them, are key to a happy relationship. And I personally, would rather go for the happy relationship than to swear off men and masturbate for the rest of my life... its so overrated...

reply to post by SLAYER69


S&F

This whole thread was hilarious, with exception to the couple serious people... I was laughing my butt off the whole time...

thanks!

whitewave
reply to post by LadySkadi

 

Because our bodies adapt to survive, it seems that the Y chromosome had come up with a unique defense. It allows for a chemical to be produced that only affects X chromosomes, basically calming females and making them "submissive". IIRC, you have to avoid condom use for the chemical to work but I had to chuckle at nature's ingenuity.
I'll have to look for that book. It's quite informative.

You know, this is literally true. It works well...

I do wonder however, if two people's body chemistry effects this also... my husband works better in this area [he hops me up on calm, seriously] than my ex [about worthless for that chemical calming thing]... so it makes me wonder why some men are more calming than others.

Although they are/were definitely different in the area of attentiveness... *clears throat* (im not talking about paying attention to a conversation either...lol) ... which may also factor in as well....

It does make you wonder though...

This thread is still going??? it popped up in my recent feed for the first time in like a year O_o;;;


@Slayer: I'm still waiting for my do-over's......

reply to post by vkey08


yeah, someone resurrected the dead. Kinda glad though cause I never saw this one the first go around... spent my morning laughing as a result!

I thought about commenting (sarcastically) to your post, but I was unsure if that was something you would have liked forgotten, so I refrained.

OpinionatedB
reply to post by vkey08

 

yeah, someone resurrected the dead. Kinda glad though cause I never saw this one the first go around... spent my morning laughing as a result!

I thought about commenting (sarcastically) to your post, but I was unsure if that was something you would have liked forgotten, so I refrained.

edit on 2-1-2014 by OpinionatedB because: (no reason given)

OOO OOO I wanna see your response PWS PWS PWS

whitewave
s-media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com...

If there were no men what we do for Darwin Awards?

Caution: personal POV follows. Women don't need men for their wallets, their ability to sire children, for moving the refrigerator on cleaning day or for taking out the garbage. We need men to have manly virtues (courage, honor, righteousness, decency, etc.) and to treat their women well.
Read a book entitled Maximized Manhood that stated the best thing a man can do for his children is to love their mother.
When men start looking at women at cooking, cleaning, beer-fetching sex machines, they can expect to be replaced.

edit on 1-1-2014 by whitewave because: (no reason given)

I dont know if I buy into all this Whitewave. I am not against it ..but I just know something about most women...and also men today.

Nothing wrong with loving the mother of ones children...definitely.

But at the same time I also know that so many women today ..and men too live in a type of glass bubble. They have no clue how the stuff which makes up our social and economic structure gets here or works. If this stuff ever breaks down ...we are all in trouble. I detect so little knowledge or ability of most of us to keep this going and particularly the women out here.

This story can only work in a social structure of great economic affluence.

You hit it right on the head here...

Don't worry guys. In a SHTF scenario, 150 years of women's suffrage will go out the window in about 5 minutes. You're safe for a while longer.

This is where the women and children will need the developed ability of men to take RISKS for the social and economic structure. A view and understanding totally avoided in feminist articles and this one too on reproduction.

Certain amounts and types of RISK taking cannot be taught to men by women and females with a consumer oriented view and understanding of this world and with social "Entitlements" in it.

I notice a stark abscence of this line of thought in these and feminist articles. RISK Taking.

The women of this country are not going to be taking the RISKS necessary to keep the economic structure going and the goods continuing...when they can default through on the type of rhetoric in this kind of phony article.

Women and females do not generally go for the Darwin Awards because they are less likely to take the kind of RISKS which qualify them for said award. But don't kid ourselves...the difference in RISK taking is one of the ingredients which separate Males from Females. And particularly the men from the boys.

As the males are more and more feminized..they will be less willing to take the RISKS for which so many of the females take for granted in the social and economic structure of economically affluent nations and peoples.

The males will become like females/feminized...."competitors."

Which brings us to the feminization of government and leadership.

Want to know why we have an NSA which must needs keep tabs on the American public by any and every means possible...????

Because they look upon us as competition...competitors... in the marketplace for goods and services. And competitors need to be controlled and regulated such that their competition can be limited and regulated. And failing in that......well ...think it through!!! It's not difficult.

In the mean time someone comes up with this drivel like in the article referenced. Planned obsolescence would be another variation of it.

As I am often prone to state...in such an economically affluent social structure the male is the most disposable and expendable sex and commodity out there in order to get people to vote and think a certain away to keep and maintain an "Entitled and Feminized Government." To break the competition against government largess.

This article is to me just a continuation and confirmation of this process.



Oh..and as far as men taking out the garbage, wallet, moving the refrigerator ...and other "manly" chores...

I offer this bit of humor with a side order of seriousness to it
concerning female psychology.

"The Nothing Box" or sometimes called "The Tale of Two Brains."

www.youtube.com...

This to me Whitewave...illustrates the very important difference in Peace and Piece.

I suggest very that few women today know the difference in Peace and Piece because few men know the difference.

That someone feels sufficiently emboldened to come up with an article like this one heading this thread strongly Illustrates my point here.

Thanks to all for their posts,
Orangetom

reply to post by orangetom1999


Aww, OT, you know I jest. Articles like the one posted in the OP are so obviously designed for propaganda that one can't possibly be expected to take them seriously. My self-worth isn't determined by what men (or women for that matter) think of me.
I do personally believe that there is a genetic "war" going on and the Y chromosome is struggling in that battle. Plenty of empirical evidence to back that up. Nature abhors a vacuum so that even if males did disappear off the planet, females would be forced to step up into all the positions that males currently occupy and provide all the "male" services that we currently enjoy: spider removal, trash emptying, risk-taking, etc.

As far as the social (not genetic) aspect of males being disposable....well, now really? I agree that men excel in Darwin Awards because they are primarily the risk-takers. Males generally like to be in charge (there is some cultural expectation in this) and take control. However, if men want women to follow/submit, they need to quit whining about the lack of submission and just take control of their own destinies. Leaders always have followers. If one has to beg, plead, cajole, or intimidate one group of people (women) into following, that's hardly a sign of leadership. According to my Christian belief, men have been put in charge of women but what they almost always forget is that they also have a headship (Christ) and if they're not willing to submit to their headship then they can hardly complain about a woman's lack of submission to theirs.

Males will always be necessary and not just for procreation. It is currently possible to impregnate a female's ovum with a single cell from another female to bring about a human baby. My personal opinion is that the real value of males is their position in the natural order of the world: the crowning of creation.

A lot of males on this thread have taken umbrage at the article which is a laughable piece of propaganda (with a bit of science thrown in) and acted like they're in a real war with zero respect shown for their "enemy" (women).

Btw, none of this is directed at you personally or any other contributors but to the ridiculousness of the gender war paradigm. It's a silly notion for males and females to argue over their differences.

The information regarding the genetics cited in the article may actually come in handy some day. There is a biblical verse that says there will come a day when 7 women will take hold of one man promising to obtain their own bread and only asking to be called by his name. When I first read that I had to wonder what had happened (or will happen) to men that such an occurrence would take place. It may be toward the end of the current Y vs. X trend when there will be a 7:1 ratio of women to men and the women realize just what desperate straits they are in.

sorry, double post. I think my computer is testosterone-operated. I need a guy to come fix it.

reply to post by OpinionatedB


to answer your question... I'm not from the days when it was a woman's job to take care of the house and such (thank god). The good old days I was talking about had to do with dating without the use of technology. I was replying to Slayer's comment. In it he responded to some comments made about robot lovers that made sandwiches and asked what happened to the good old days which I took as the days when technology wasn't involved in relationships. So, my good old days comment had a lot to do with technology.

Also, I don't think I said that I agreed with the article, but I did say that I understood why SOME women would.

I was just pointing out that today there a number of women out there who actually do not like being "housewives" and I am one of them. That doesn't mean that I won't clean the house or make my guy a sandwich, meal, etc because I will, but I expect him to do the same for me and to not expect me to do everything all the time solely because I am a "woman" which some of the comments I read suggested. ( could have been for a laugh, but I don't know)

And if there are women out there who want to live their lives masturbating and everything... More power to them.

reply to post by whitewave


Finally! Someone here who gets it. I gave you a star. Cheers.