calazhage Posted February 15, 2009 Share Posted February 15, 2009 I think every man on Earth has made statements against the female gender at one time or another. So? As I am sure females have. That is all they are doing here as well, venting.. Link to post Share on other sites
Woggle Posted February 15, 2009 Share Posted February 15, 2009 I am not erasing women as individuals or any of that but the issues brought up in this thread are real issues that men of today deal with and I offer my perspective on how men can deal with them. Good for you if you have never dealt with this drama in your relationships with women but most men have. The relationship world is rough and and with the cold war between men and women I am just sharing some of my battle tactics. Link to post Share on other sites
Taramere Posted February 15, 2009 Share Posted February 15, 2009 I think every man on Earth has made statements against the female gender at one time or another. So? As I am sure females have. That is all they are doing here as well, venting.. I will vent about individual men who irritate me. If it gets to the point where I can't think of anything good about a particular guy then it's my responsibility to have no further dealings with him. Any time friends and I start generalising about men, we'll laugh at ourselves for doing it....and we also tend to check eachother if the venting goes on for too long. I can remember a former boss and a secretary venting in a really serious and depressing way over lunch. "Men today....thank God I'm not single....seems like they're all just out to use women for sex....no such thing as love any more....they're cheats....users....lazy....don't take any personal accountability....I just wouldn't bother with any of them if I lost my husband." My attitude wasn't "oh goody. A vent. Isn't this fun?" It was "what a depressing and draining pair to be spending my lunch break with." Essentially they seemed to be trying to give out the message "we're happy, but of course it's not possible for younger woman in this day and age to find a man and be happy with him. Thank God we're not them...." A bit like Woggle's message of "I finally found a good woman, but I was really lucky. Other men are unlikely to be so lucky. Most women are pretty sh*t really..." Personally I don't care if Woggle thinks most women are sh*t. I see his comments as being more about "I'm happier than you'll ever be" competitiveness with other men than anything else. Similar to my boss and the secretary's "we're lucky, we found good men....but the ones that are left are sh*t...." message. People like that, of either gender a bit draining and....well, pointless really. Schadenfreude and any examples that support their belief in the malice of humanity bring the closest thing to happiness they're capable of feeling. Like dementors from the Harry Potter books and films, they suck all the happiness out of people. Always complaining, never discussing solutions or positive ways forward. I'm not sure about the term misogynist being applied to every whiner on this site who happens to be male. I think that bitching about women can be a form of bonding between men who don't know eachother. It could just as easily involve bitching about politics, the crap performance of their sports team, the weather, the crime rate. Maybe it's just a lazy, mindless alternative for people who aren't great at the art of conversation, but who want to contribute nonetheless. Link to post Share on other sites
grogster Posted February 15, 2009 Share Posted February 15, 2009 I'm not sure about the term misogynist being applied to every whiner on this site who happens to be male. I think that bitching about women can be a form of bonding between men who don't know eachother. It could just as easily involve bitching about politics, the crap performance of their sports team, the weather, the crime rate. Maybe it's just a lazy, mindless alternative for people who aren't great at the art of conversation, but who want to contribute nonetheless. I agree, these man-boy victims are not misogynists. Rather, their women-bashing is merely a "lazy, mindless alternative" for the conversationally challenged. Well, that's certainly better. Link to post Share on other sites
lord alfred douglas Posted February 15, 2009 Share Posted February 15, 2009 I agree, these man-boy victims are not misogynists. Rather, their women-bashing is merely a "lazy, mindless alternative" for the conversationally challenged. Well, that's certainly better. whos side are you on? Link to post Share on other sites
Double Oh Seven Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 I have respect for any man who deserves it, just like anyone else, gender aside... I have to agree. Respect is earned. Not bought with looks, money or both. Male or female, you have to earn it. Link to post Share on other sites
Mahatma Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 Genetically, women are to find a man who can provide for their children. Generally, a guy making 23k a year can barely support himself, much less a wife and kids. All that stupid survey figured out was that women use measurements other than looks to decide on a man. Very very biased survey. This whole thing about women like rich men is crap. Women just want a guy who is on his feet. I highly doubt the majority of women would use the difference of a 100k a year salary and a 250k a year salary as a huge deciding factor. I could be very wrong though. Link to post Share on other sites
Miss Ting Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 IMO, a man I deem as unattractive wouldn't suddenly become asthetically pleasing to me just because I learned he was making 6 figures...in fact, my typical response would be something along the lines of "what a waste." However, a really attractive man could definitely lose his appeal if I found out he was making minimum wage. "Appeal" however, does not equate to "physical attractiveness". If you look good, you look good, and nothing outside of a physical alteration is going to change that opinion for me. Link to post Share on other sites
Author clv0116 Posted February 16, 2009 Author Share Posted February 16, 2009 IMO, a man I deem as unattractive wouldn't suddenly become asthetically pleasing to me just because I learned he was making 6 figures...in fact, my typical response would be something along the lines of "what a waste." However, a really attractive man could definitely lose his appeal if I found out he was making minimum wage. "Appeal" however, does not equate to "physical attractiveness". If you look good, you look good, and nothing outside of a physical alteration is going to change that opinion for me. It's interesting that you and a lot of women say that, but what a lot of women do is different. Maybe you really are an exception, maybe not, but there's no way to tell based on what you say. Link to post Share on other sites
Peter_pan Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 you gotta make the money first. Then when you get the money, you get the power. Then when you get the power, then you get the woman." scar face- sums it up really. girls dont go for looks... Link to post Share on other sites
Author clv0116 Posted February 18, 2009 Author Share Posted February 18, 2009 Um, you are quoting from A SCRIPT! We're not all gold diggers. Where does this gold digger thing come from? It's not wrong or unnatural for a woman to find the ability to provide attractive, why try to demonize a perfectly natural and harmless behavior? Link to post Share on other sites
Author clv0116 Posted February 23, 2009 Author Share Posted February 23, 2009 Bumpity bump, 'cause this just HAS to be reiterated. It just makes some of the ignorant statements in this thread too hilarious to pass up reposting it!! And who doesn't enjoy a nice celebrity anecdote, really? In classic economics, a marriage is, at least in part, an exercise in labor specialization. Traditionally, men have tended to do "market" or paid work outside the home, and women have tended to do "nonmarket" or household work, including raising children. All of the work must get done by somebody, and this pairing, regardless of who is in the home and who is outside the home, accomplishes that goal. Nobel laureate Gary S. Becker argued that when the labor specialization in a marriage decreases--if, for example, both spouses have careers--the overall value of the marriage is lower for both partners because less of the total needed work is getting done Hmmmm. Link to post Share on other sites
Author clv0116 Posted February 24, 2009 Author Share Posted February 24, 2009 Oh, so now not only do .... In 1996 a man suffered a gunshot wound to the head and survived. Therefore gunshot wounds to the head are not terribly dangerous. Anecdotes, love 'em or hate 'em, they're always fun. Link to post Share on other sites
Author clv0116 Posted February 24, 2009 Author Share Posted February 24, 2009 You know someone has lost a debate when they start pullin' BS outta dark places. My point exactly. Using anecdotes as indicative of anything but the condition of the people in question is logical suicide. This is why we have statistics. Link to post Share on other sites
CaliGuy Posted February 24, 2009 Share Posted February 24, 2009 I'm way late into this thread, but a couple of things strike me about this Discovery Channel report. First off the report seems to be biased, basing things on the only criteria available to women: Looks and Income. To this I say: "DUH!" Women rate men on a couple of VERY instinctual qualities. One of them is their ability to PROVIDE. Secondly, note the women said "more attractive" they did not say "I would date this man..." Dating, love and marriage have so many factors included in them that you can not say for sure what works or what does not work. In the context of this survey, the women were provided with very little information and had to take the guys for face value. Do you know what really attracts women? Yes, being able to provide is one of them. But it's how a man makes a woman FEEL that determines if she can ever love him. What contributes to feel? It's a man being a man. Confident, secure, happy and for the most part, a good sense of humor. Confidence overcomes many other negative qualities (which is why you see women attracted to jerks. It's not that jerks are confident, it's that they give off the ILLUSION of confidence). I would take this report with a grain of salt. The results are exactly what I would expect when a woman is given very little information to go on. So for men if you get anything out of this, put up the best picture you can on a dating profile and if you make good money, let them know. Of course, odds are you might end up with a gold digger, but hey, if you're ok with that, more power to you. Cheers. Link to post Share on other sites
Author clv0116 Posted February 24, 2009 Author Share Posted February 24, 2009 .... note the women said "more attractive" they did not say "I would date this man..." Dating, love and marriage have so many factors included in them that you can not say for sure what works or what does not work. In the context of this survey, the women were provided with very little information and had to take the guys for face value. That was the point of the survey; all else equal (in this case, equally unknown) money makes you more handsome. A lot of money makes you a LOT more handsome. That's the bottom line really. Of course there is a lot more to dating than just looks and money but this study was designed to evaluate those factors. The interesting thing is the women were NOT asked to evaluate the men on 'datability' or attraction. They were SPECIFICALLY asked to rate their looks 1-10. Men with money looked better. I find the implication that this process is subconscious fascinating. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts