Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I am female, so this is not meant as a criticism of women. We females have our nature, which is necessary for any society. But men also have their nature, which is also necessary.
Now, of course, women have some male traits and men have some female traits. But overall, there are general tendencies. Women are less interested in competition and more interested in cooperation. Women are more interested in love, and less interested in violence.
Of course you will find exceptions all over the place. Please just look at general tendencies. Women are MUCH less interested in violence than men are, or in violent sports.
Our society has been increasingly feminized mostly by liberal/progressive ideology.
So this means men will hide their violent competitive natures and become hypocrites. And our nation will deny the need for strong defense.
This is why, I think, Trump was elected. He seems to be tough. I am not saying I like Trump, just that I can see why half the country does like him, and his supporters are more likely to be male.
The wimpification of our society is a problem. Women don't mind as much as men, because at least our natures are not being warped by it. But men's are.
The election of Trump is a backlash.
The other day I was outside and I stomped on a bug. A man who happens to be a Liberal saw me and he said "Why'd you kill that bug? it wasn't hurting you." When I was a kid I never killed bugs, I could not stand to cause harm to any living thing. I was brainwashed into liberal ideology. But I have gradually over many years tried to de-program myself. Women used to be a lot tougher than we are now, also. Men certainly were.
I thought we liberals were baby killers.... I'm so confused. I didn't know I was so wimpy.
Well..your use of language is certainly 'old school'
First of all, I will always take being called old school as a compliment, whether it is meant that way or not.
Your comment was related to me abbreviating homosexual by typing homo.
Now I want you to serious think about what I am going to say.
In the very sentence I used the shortened homo, I also shortened heterosexual by saying hetero. Yet you did not highlight that. Now ask yourself why you seemingly object to me typing homo, but do not raise an eyebrow when I typed hetero?
I propose that you have been conditioned into a reaction based on political correctness, maybe without even knowing it.
Now rest assured PC does not have a place in my life, but many have been brainwashed with it. To the point of them knee-jerking over a term that does not even apply to them. As a matter of fact, many people get more upset than the group of people it is said about. It is almost as if these PC indoctrinated people feel compelled to act on behalf of others, despite the people who the comment is about not feeling offended.
The same is true of shorting transsexual by typing tranny. The most famous tranny is some guy named RuPaul, and he not only uses the term himself, but has said many times it is not considered offense by his community.
So if homos and tranny's do not object to those terms (and assuming you are neither of those), why (honestly) do you think my shortening the terms (like I did with hetero) caused you to react in the manner that you did
But men are NOT inferior, and men should NOT try to be more like women. That will only make them fake hypocrites, pretending to be what they are not.
For the same reason I do not subscribe to the transgenderism that seems to be sweeping through our nation (no offense to those TG on this board, but gender identity doesn't make a lick of sense to me), I do not subscribe to the gender identity you are peddling either. You cannot tell me what it's like to be a woman any more than I can tell you what it's like to be a woman. I can tell you what it's like to be Cassy, and you can tell what it's like to be good4nothin.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NVplumber
A man cannot act as a gentleman anymore without being labeled a chauvinistic pig. As you say, a simple courtesy of holding a door becomes an insult to a woman's own physical ability.
I agree that anyone who would be insulted by that is ridiculous. I've never personally met such a person. I get annoyed by people who just let the door close in your face because that's just rude.
The feminization of men in our society is being done on purpose by the Leftists to weaken the country. Militarily and economically on the world stage by filling both complexes with ultra sissies who couldn't negotiate or fight their way out of a wet paper bag and who will easily tuck their tails and run instead of fighting to be on top.
So to you, femininity equals weakness.
Good to know and helps me understand your positions on other subjects more clearly. Not agree, but understand.
this post is too funny-- I raised three boys to be men- not violent- and they all have their different characters- mostly easy going - but will kick aXX when they have to-- just like MA-- do not misinterpret - what a man is---nor strength of a female.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bell235
They are already men, that's the difference. if they are already men in present day, they were probably not effected by this trend which is affecting CURRENT young boys.
Please.
My sons are being raised in the present day and they are very similar to tinytrump's kids. They have their own characters, mostly easy going but will step up when they have to. Whether its protecting each other, their friends, etc. they are not cowards about it.
That being said, my nieces are the same way.
This has very little to do with male/female biology; more due to raising decent human beings who know how to treat others and themselves and know when the proverbial **** goes down they need to step up to the plate.
It was someone I know, and I know he claims to be a liberal.
After he said that, I asked if he is a pacifist and he said yes. I said I am the opposite of a pacifist, and it's true. It is wrong to attack other countries unprovoked, but a pacifist nation that won't defend itself would be out of business real quick.
So, you are asserting that male pacifists aren't masculine? You've also asserted that men can't survive in the wilderness today.
What about Amish men? They are pacifist AND they live a very rural, agricultural life in a traditional community where men and women have strict roles. Are Amish men manly or not?
Oh stop. "Revere the sanctity of life" that sounds so lofty. Too bad it's stupid.
Do other animals revere the sanctity of life? Not when they are hungry. And NEITHER DO WE. Unless you are a vegan -- but even then you kill those poor defenseless plants.
Life on earth REQUIRES killing.
On the other hand, every society on earth, human or animal, generally prohibits killing members of your own social group. With some exceptions of course.
All animals have violent instincts, for self-protection. Having violent instincts can mean ENJOYING violence.
If you have not noticed, little boys want to play with toy guns. You will deny it, of course, and say YOUR little boys play with Barbie dolls instead.
My boys played with toy guns, cars, play kitchens, baby dolls and Barbie dolls. Imagine that.
My sons are being raised in the present day and they are very similar to tinytrump's kids. They have their own characters, mostly easy going but will step up when they have to. Whether its protecting each other, their friends, etc. they are not cowards about it.
That being said, my nieces are the same way.
This has very little to do with male/female biology; more due to raising decent human beings who know how to treat others and themselves and know when the proverbial **** goes down they need to step up to the plate.
In threads like this it seems to be one of two things from that side of the gate. Either people are reconciling their own inadequacies by assigning them to gender and subsequently avoiding accountability for their character flaws or they are incapable of identifying self-value without putting others (women in this case) down.
Good to know and helps me understand your positions on other subjects more clearly. Not agree, but understand.
I don't think he is saying that at all. It is more being genuine to who you are, and your natural make up, and not "pretending" to be something else. Men, and women are different and have different traits. No?
I don't think he is saying that at all. It is more being genuine to who you are, and your natural make up, and not "pretending" to be something else. Men, and women are different and have different traits. No?
Yes, that's right. And females have male traits and males have female traits -- it's a question of how much you have of each. In order to not be a fake unhappy hypocrite, you need to acknowledge what you are.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
