The War on Men

Originally posted by votan
ndiana jones , james bond and rambo types are the reason why feminism began in the first place. they are not symbols of masculinity more like symbols that drove women to feminism. Womanizers who fear commitment or are too invovled with killing and have mental issues. Rambo, james bond and indiana jones are to men as as la femme nikita, xena warrior princess and lara croft are to women.

really?? that is what you think masculinity is??? No woman wants that crap. One thing is to be rough and gruff another thing is to be a turd like the examples you just spouted out. You really have no clue what a man is.

Keep your shirt on Esmeralda. I didn't say this is what i view an ideal man to be. I was merely stating men like this are often viewed as "real man" by a large portion of males and the fact that these characters are still immensely popular today shows that men haven't been brainwashed by the media and are only accepting weak and feeble minded images of us.

Good lord if people unrustled their jimmies i wouldn't have to keep explaining what is so damn obvious.

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by AceWombat04

The legal system's pro-female bias is one such area. My father dealt with this particular issue despite being the more mentally stable, gainfully employed, level headed of the two parties, so I have seen it happen. He suffered greatly because of this and is only now recovering psychologically from it, though he would never admit that. We are close and I can tell.

Yes - - but I don't see how this has anything to do with Feminism.

This is social structure. Society still believes the mother is the better caretaker of children.

Just like society still believes men are better leaders.

If anything Feminism has helped men out of their programmed role in society - - - and made society aware that men can and want to be the custodial parent.

I agree. The destruction of antiqued social roles associated with gender (for both men and women) is one of the many things feminism has contributed to society that is far and away positive.

But the topic isn't strictly about feminism. It's also about social inequalities and biases, which still exist against both genders. My post was intended to give just one small example of one such bias against men that I have experienced and witnessed firsthand.

Peace.

Originally posted by AceWombat04

But the topic isn't strictly about feminism. It's also about social inequalities and biases, which still exist against both genders. My post was intended to give just one small example of one such bias against men that I have experienced and witnessed firsthand.

Peace.

I agree there is bias. Just not because of Feminism.

When I got divorced in the 70s - - - women still had no legal right to established credit built up during their marriage if it was in their husband's name. If you were the typical stay at home mom. You were screwed.

While courts still favor women in custody cases - - more and more men are winning. Courts are also listening to the children more.

While I tend to agree that courts tend to favor women in regards to anything from divorce to murder trials (just look at any serial killer couple. The woman usually gets off, even when she helps murder her own sister, while the man gets the death penalty) I can't ignore that, scientifically, some of it makes a bit of sense.

During pregnancy, women produce large amounts of oxytocin, found in their spinal cord, which contributes to the "maternal instinct". Men don't receive this, and chemically they aren't made for nurturing. There are always exceptions, but in general, women are better caretakers both mentally and physiologically. Throughout the animal kingdom, it is not uncommon for males to kill the young in order to maintain their own dominance. This is a current hypothesis for human evolution, as well. Incidentally, oxytocin is found in large amounts in OCD patients' spinal fluid as well.

Women also have less risk for psychopathy and other "warrior genes". These genes, for the most part, including the MAO-A gene exists on the X chromosome, giving women a distinctly better chance of receiving a dominant or co-dominant gene as they receive two X's, while men receive only one.

Then you consider that even nature considers women more important than men, and you can see why men get the short end of the stick a lot of the time. In developed countries, birthrates of males has dropped. In a study to find out why, it has been concluded that during times of famine, more females tend to be born, while men tend to be born during times of abundance. Just imagine trying to populate the planet with 50 dudes and one girl and you'll understand why. phys.org... In case you had trouble finding the source. The rest of what I said is pretty easy to find on your own.

reply to post by FailedProphet


www.abovetopsecret.com...

This is a thread I put out a while back.

Be prepared for the man haters in here.

I do agree with you though.

Males in general and boys in particular are being preached to about being more "sensitive". With all the hormones and such in our food (BPA), it explains why so many are such little wuss's.

I have no problem with a strong woman. I'm married to her! My bride is just damn near as tough as any man BUT she is still quite the Lady. Our daughter takes after her mother and I'm damn proud of that as well.

The thing they have in common? They both prefer a strong man. A man and woman should walk side by side through life, not one behind the other.

This is all another attack on society. Destroy the family, destroy the society, destroy the country.

American women... gag me with a spoon.

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by AceWombat04

But the topic isn't strictly about feminism. It's also about social inequalities and biases, which still exist against both genders. My post was intended to give just one small example of one such bias against men that I have experienced and witnessed firsthand.

Peace.

I agree there is bias. Just not because of Feminism.

When I got divorced in the 70s - - - women still had no legal right to established credit built up during their marriage if it was in their husband's name. If you were the typical stay at home mom. You were screwed.

While courts still favor women in custody cases - - more and more men are winning. Courts are also listening to the children more.

I would never argue that bias exists because of feminism. Feminism, at least as I define it, is a good and necessary thing. I think perhaps the intent of my post has been misinterpreted. If so, I apologize.

Peace.

Originally posted by PurpleChiten

Originally posted by paganini


For every bumbling Ray Romano or Doug Heffernan character theres a heap of strong intelligent male characters. Rambo, Indiana Jones, James Bond, the expendables, the numerous superhero movies out now, etc,etc. Some of these are even images of masculinity that have remained popular for decades so this is nonsense. It seems like the crack pots mens rights activists just get their panties in a bunch anytime a man is portrayed in a way they dont like.

The men who complain the most about "women not being women" are the men who don't know how to be men.

If you are honorable, brave, strong, hardworking, intelligent and give 100% in everything you do, you will attract the kind of person you want.

If you want a certain type of wife, then you need to be the type of man who attracts the kind you're looking for.

You can't be an overweight computer nerd living in your mother's basement wearing dirty sweats and sit and wonder why you can't find a woman like they had in the 50's. It's not going to happen.

Be the person that the person you want is looking for. Otherwise, she'll find somebody who is.

(not aimed at you paganini, in agreement to you

)

You speak in absolute terms, but in this matter as in all things, the truth lies somewhere in between. Hollywood stands as an example of how we the people of Earth should not* try to be. In general though, people do try to copy Hollywood. Women should be partners and not slaves, but today women want to lead yet be supported. Women seek to be protected, yet to dominate. Not all women are this way, but it seems the overwhelming majority of women are becoming this way. They watch "Sex in the City", then try to rationalize those lifestyles which are portrayed, when in reality it is pure poison. It is romanticized smuttiness, icing-coated corruption, and above all it is a "lie". =)

Men should protect our women and lead our sons and daughters, with our women's motherly advice and feminine support in heart. Fatherly example~~

Women should support, encourage and guide a man soul while leading our sons and daughters with the motherly example~~ This is "natural".

Here I will put a quote from my ancestors

Originally posted by AceWombat04

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by AceWombat04

But the topic isn't strictly about feminism. It's also about social inequalities and biases, which still exist against both genders. My post was intended to give just one small example of one such bias against men that I have experienced and witnessed firsthand.

Peace.

I agree there is bias. Just not because of Feminism.

When I got divorced in the 70s - - - women still had no legal right to established credit built up during their marriage if it was in their husband's name. If you were the typical stay at home mom. You were screwed.

While courts still favor women in custody cases - - more and more men are winning. Courts are also listening to the children more.

I would never argue that bias exists because of feminism. Feminism, at least as I define it, is a good and necessary thing. I think perhaps the intent of my post has been misinterpreted. If so, I apologize.

Peace.

On no no - - you are fine. You said the OP was also about gender bias.

"Just not because of Feminism" - - was to make it clear to everyone else.

reply to post by skepticconwatcher


Not all men are like this , not all men are gun/knife wielding alpha males that go around harrasing womans or beat up weaker humans all in the name of ego
Both males and females keep this "law of the jungle" rule in place because they attract each other , in the entire human history woman have always had a weak spot for more dominant males.
Dont get me wrong though , i believe that female's actually should be treaten equal as men , also in key positions in governments or other positions of power/organisations , they are our mothers,sisters ,grandma's, girlfriends, wifes,daughters , aunts etc.

I found your reply a bit offensive but i wont judge you in any way , we all have bad experiences in different area's regarding life , we are only human

TheGreazel

Originally posted by TheGreazel
... in the entire human history woman have always had a weak spot for more dominant males.

Glad somebody else mentioned it first.
Yes, sexual selection at work.

There is a range of male behaviour from ...
scaredycatweak - timid - nice - average - bold - dominant - aggressive - wifebeater

But it is women themselves who have ensured over the millenia, that the bell curve remains on the right hand side.
If the female sexual selection characteristic had decided to choose nice guys, then the wifebeater outlier would be a smaller value.


So to answer the question "when will this end"?
A: When all women choose unanimously to only mate with nice guys, and reject bold/dominant.
(ie: never)

reply to post by FailedProphet


For the most part, I think women have changed for the better. Probably men too.

Marriage on the other hand is a raw deal for men. Time and time again, I hear horror stories of men being taken for just about everything via divorce. Perhaps they were not the best husbands. Probably not in fact. In any case, a woman can marry a man, cheat on him then take him for most of his life savings. Even earned before they met. I know I wouldn't get married for all the rice in China. I told my girlfriend that the night I met her and the ultimate reason is as stated in the O.P.

Rarely do I hear about or see happy, successful and equal marriages. Not never, just rarely. Men coming out on top after divorce? Never. No matter what the circumstances. NEVER.

reply to post by JDmOKI


She probably did not think of you as her equal, I've wielded feminine power before so I can say this. I would recommend looking for someone who you think is equal to you, that usually would result in the best relationship (in my psychology courses I learned about this). I wouldn't feel bad about whatever "status" you have, in reality humans are all equal, but think of it more like lifestyle choice that best suits you rather than some kind of structured hierarchy and try to find someone with a similar lifestyle.

Oh, and she wasn't worth your time.

And I was just thinking about writing a thread about feminine responsibility.

reply to post by darkbake


I'll admit she ruined my image of woman as a whole. I distrusted woman and didn't date for a long time. She defiantly did some work on me. I believe many men and woman act selfishly based on past disappointments.

Example, I had a great girl, very trustworthy, wholesome girl. I still had a hard time trusting her. We didn't break up over trust but still couldn't get over my heart getting torn from my chest.

Trust issues is a work in progress for me.

Originally posted by skepticconwatcher
reply to post by FailedProphet

 

FOX NEWS ?

Ha. Okay.

No. Women of today are NOT wanting to get married as we see it as nothing more than a lifetime job as a grown mans baby sitter , housekeeper and sex slave.

NO THANKS.

Ummm... I'm sort of partial to my baby sitter, house keeper, and sex slave. I'd kill for that woman, and I think she may be starting to realize that! In any event, she does seem OK with the setup! I get to wrestle the wildebeest, and she gets to cook it - which job would you REALLY rather have?

In all honesty, though, the babysitter thing is a little overbearing. Who really wants to be reminded to eat, and take their vitamins and such? On the other hand, when momma speaks, daddy better listen... or he runs the risk of having to cook his OWN damned wildebeest!

Originally posted by PurpleChiten
Strong, handome men who can actually rescue a situation are fewer and further between. Too many are overweight geeks living with their parents becasue they don't want to grow up and take responsibility. You have to fit the role you want to have. If you don't fit the role, don't expect a woman who fits the role to be interested in you.

Truer words were never spoken. If you've got it going on, you can rise above any media hype and stereotypes they try to fling at you!

Personally, I have trouble finding ones who can have an intelligent converatio and isn't all "touchy feely", constantly needing attention. I've dated wway too many who try to fill the role of "housewife", but that isn't what I want. Maybe I'm too strong and forefull and need to ease up a little in order to attract what I want.

I don't have a problem with touchy-feely DURING an intelligent conversation - two birds, one stone, eh? No reason that it HAS to be either/or...

Originally posted by MajorKarma

Anyway, the fact that I am tall, good looking and able to charm my way when I want to aside, women are mercenary and when things get bad, really bad, you will find women are not as stupid as some think; you will find the best looking women playing "Weak Woman" and deserting their Feminist Aspirations for the security they can find with men who can cut it, protect and provide for them.

You know, I've had two women (one of whom I was married to at the time) tell me that, PRECISELY that. I got the distinct feeling they were letting secrets from The Sisterhood slip in a moment of weakness!

reply to post by paganini


ok if that what u say is true, i ask you why are men and women treated differently when it comes to domestic abuse, bars and relationships. even though we are all "equal" now.

Originally posted by DocHolidaze
reply to post by paganini

 

ok if that what u say is true, i ask you why are men and women treated differently when it comes to domestic abuse, bars and relationships. even though we are all "equal" now.

What in the hell does this have to do with what you brought up initially and what i debunked? You brought up the women in children first in disasters and i showed it was a myth.

Now all the sudden youre bringing bars into this?

There has been an absolute lack of coherent thought in many of the posts here. Someone starts in about this not being fair then when its addressed they suddenly veer off into another direction that is entirely unrelated to what is being discussed.

What i debunked has nothing to do with bars and domestic violence or relationships and whatever youre getting at with this does not affect the matter concerning what was previously talked about in regards to either proving or disproving it.

Understand?