Feminists are ruining men.

[mesmerized]

I'd wager that Tayla has a far better grasp on feminism than dasein does .

 

I wonder if any of these men who complain and complain would ever be willing to be a woman if they could. This world is still pretty much a man's world and almost in every aspect men have it better than us!

 

Well, ofcourse they're not happy that they can't marry a hot little bimbo, use up her youth and throw her out without having to pay alimony! Or that they can't just rape their wife just because she is their wife and has to give it up. I see how hard these all are on men.

[dasein]

I wonder if any of these men who complain and complain would ever be willing to be a woman if they could. This world is still pretty much a man's world and almost in every aspect men have it better than us!

 

I wonder if you realize that "feminism" is not "women?" There are millions of women in this country who aren't feminists, several here on this board. They don't need the destructive gimmicks of feminism to get ahead in the world, whether getting ahead means family or work, they do just fine without that illegitimate, discriminatory crutch.

 

Or that they can't just rape their wife just because she is their wife and has to give it up.

 

Obnoxious, and a symptom of being indoctrinated into a victim mentality, of seeing men as the lowest common denominator. Of course, men who complain about feminism are all frustrated, closet rapists. Got any Dworkin or Solanas quotes to back that sentiment up? I have some if you want to continue down the "men as rapists" track. Would -love- to have an excuse to post some of them.

[betterdeal]

Women! You can't live with 'em, and you can't kill 'em. I hate it when you're having sex and they can't find your penis, dribble, moan, blah blah blah....

[musemaj11]

"Give me equal pay in the workplace. But when the bills come, YOU ARE paying." - Feminism

[Taramere]

whats ruining us is we don't know whos a feminist and who isn't a feminist or who's halfway a feminist. one gal expects you to hold the door for her and the next is offended we do it.

 

Well, some men like large breasts and some don't. Some are pleased when a woman offers to pay, others are offended. Some like little pixie women who gather wild flowers and pretend to believe in fairies, others find those women annoying. Some men thank me when I keep the door open for them, others push it masterfully while I've got my hand against it...so that if I weren't already mentally prepared for such a turn of events, I would fall clumsily through the door.

 

Some people are gauche, rude, mentally disturbed, having a bad day...or shy to the point of being offensively so... and simply don't handle other people's social graces very well. It isn't automatically anything to do with feminism. Not every piece of behaviour emanating from a woman stems from a set of political beliefs.

 

Women varying in their beliefs, temperaments, responses and behaviour is enough to ruin you? One might as well say that life sets out to ruin us from the moment we're ejected, as mewling bundles of terror and self pity, from the womb. Actually, it probably does.

[musemaj11]

Good Christ - you feel you're being "taken for granted" for treating a lady to a $15.99 entree at the local Olive Garden?

Yeah, because a man is only going to go on a date ONCE in his LIFETIME.

[plowguy1]

1. During almost all of history when average women didn't have certain rights, average men did not have them either. For the most part, feminism wildly exaggerates these disparities for political gain. All people "had it bad" in the past, women no moreso than men.

 

2. Ladies did not "step up and empower themselves." Women joining the workforce was a matter of technological advance and economic imperative in the U.S., a confluence of longer lifespan, lower infant and mother mortality, birth control, the emergence of a white collar less dangerous workplace, a labor thirsty post WW2 and Cold War environment. Feminism had nothing to do with these factors.The Futurist: The Misandry Bubble

 

3. The fault of men has been in not taking feminism seriously enough as a discriminatory, polarizing political doctrine. The damage done by feminism in our society is massive, and despite that the internet has drawn its poison out into the light of day, won't be easily undone.

 

This is the truth, and just the tip of the ice berg. Too bad some like frustrated standards will never realize it, cause they just don't care to. I wonder if she has brothers?... If you really want a good understanding of this read this The Futurist: The Misandry Bubble. but I'm sure most won't. and daesin you rock brother, keep calmly saying the truth

[namenottaken]

The appropriateness of your analogy is completely lost on me.

 

You really haven't refuted anything I've said either. Very few men will care, let alone be able to tell, what designer made your handbag or your shoes. Same goes for all the other procedures and products I listed that I supposedly have the expectation of women using, to the point where how much women choose to spend to pamper themselves and indulge in their vanity is somehow men's fault.

 

It’s lost on me too.

 

I cut my own hair. I have for 15 years and get compliments on it all the time. To be fair, it’s long and if I mess it up it’s not obvious.

 

I buy a 4 pack of razors, for $20, and take care of the hair on my body myself. The thing about waxing is you gotta let the hair grow out to an unattractive length before you can get it taken care of. I can shave every day and have soft and smooth skin all the time.

 

I do my own manicures and pedicures and get compliments on my nails all the time. Not too long ago a man walked up to me and said “This might sound weird, (it did) but you have very pretty nails.” It cost me $10 to do them, and I get a lot more uses than one.

 

I used to spend $50 on bras and panties (VS) until I realized what crappy quality they were. Now I can spend $20 for ones that are just as sexy,but don’t have a designer name attached. Unless a man reads the label he’ll never know the difference, and I haven’t met one who really cares. When it gets to the point of him seeing them, they won’t be on long anyway.

 

I buy my make-up at the drug store (oh, the horror). It lasts more than one use, quite a while actually, and it works well for me.

 

When I was dating, I always made sure the first date was casual. I wore jeans (I already owned), a nice top (I already owned), and shoes or boots(I already owned). Every first date I went on ended in a request for a second one. I also carried cash with me and offered to pay, but it was never accepted. I didn’t argue about. I took it as the nice gesture it was and said “thank you”.

 

All the money some women say they put out for a date is ridiculous. She still has her clothing and toiletries/make-up at the end of the date that can be used another time. I do all of the above (on a regular basis) regardless of whether I have a date or not, because I want to, and it makes me feel good. I just put a little more effort in when I do have a date.

 

I could choose to pay someone to do those things for me, and that would be on me; I can’t use a date as the reason why.

 

Now let’s talk about the price of a decent suit for a man. $1000? $1500? If he wears it on a date, can he then say that he already spent a lot of money on that person? What about silk boxer’s? Can he include the cost of those too? And what about the tie and shirt? Some of those aren’t cheap either. Somehow, I don’t think that would fly.

 

What someone spends getting ready for a date is on them, not the person they’re dating.

 

*Funny, I don’t see any complaints about the sexual revolution in this thread.

[zengirl]

There are still plenty of men who will open doors and pick up checks. Some of them are worth dating, and some are not. That's true of the guys who don't open doors or pick up checks too. IME, most men I've dated have done those things (though not picked up every check in the whole relationship -- as I wouldn't be into that, though they've never suggested I pick up a check either; always been of my own common sense of basic manners) despite being fans of women having equal rights and not being intimidated by successful women who are otherwise equal to them. I don't think finding such men is difficult at all and I'm not sure why the OP is having such trouble, honestly. Plenty of men have those kind of manners. Of course, when you pile on top all her other requirements, I suppose it does get weighty.

 

All this talk about Canadian men and how they SOOO aren't FS's cup of tea....um... makes me kinda want to move THERE.

 

Yea, the native born Canadian guy friend of mine 'liked' the pic of me with no makeup in my backpacking gear more than the pics of me all glammed out.

 

There is some wisdom here I've missed before.... hmmm.

 

While I've met many Canadian women I didn't care for (most of the biggest bullies and mean girls I've met in my life were Canadians in Asia -- however the Canadian people on this board seem perfectly nice; perhaps those people just left the country for a reason, I don't know), all the Canadian men I've ever met were really nice guys. And, yes, IME, many are outdoorsy. I'm sure some aren't, but that seems to be part of the culture.

Edited April 4, 2012 by zengirl

[Els]

There are still plenty of men who will open doors and pick up checks. Some of them are worth dating, and some are not. That's true of the guys who don't open doors or pick up checks too. IME, most men I've dated have done those things (though not picked up every check in the whole relationship -- as I wouldn't be into that, though they've never suggested I pick up a check either; always been of my own common sense of basic manners) despite being fans of women having equal rights and not being intimidated by successful women who are otherwise equal to them. I don't think finding such men is difficult at all and I'm not sure why the OP is having such trouble, honestly. Plenty of men have those kind of manners.

 

Agreed. I honestly think the reason OP is having trouble is because she feels she is entitled to it, and doesn't mince about that. Most guys I know who do this sort of stuff, want to be appreciated for it. They don't want a woman to take it for granted, and to act like it's something they SHOULD do, I guess.

[dasein]

*Funny, I don’t see any complaints about the sexual revolution in this thread.

 

Haha, good point. Looked at objectively, in terms of social results, STDs, illegitimacy rate, single parent families, it had some harsh results. But subjectively and selfishly, would be hard to "give back" the benefits of a looser sexual climate.

[xxoo]

Are you seriously trying to tell us that if a woman wasn't actively dating that she would walk around & go to her professional job

each day sporting.." bumpy legs with hair stubs, bitten down and cracked nails, excess skin on the feet and brittle toenails, messy eyebrows and bed hair"

 

Wear pants and shoes. Then you don't have to shave or get a pedi until spring

[RedRobin]

Agreed. I honestly think the reason OP is having trouble is because she feels she is entitled to it, and doesn't mince about that. Most guys I know who do this sort of stuff, want to be appreciated for it. They don't want a woman to take it for granted, and to act like it's something they SHOULD do, I guess.

 

Yes, that might be the missing ingredient. Appreciation.

 

As I often like to say... "every job is a volunteer job"

[FitChick]

I've had men express surprise at my thanking them for things they've done or bought for me. It seems that women they dated previously seldom did. Such a simple gesture that costs nothing yet means so much. Men aren't that difficult to please, ladies.

[zengirl]

Agreed. I honestly think the reason OP is having trouble is because she feels she is entitled to it, and doesn't mince about that. Most guys I know who do this sort of stuff, want to be appreciated for it. They don't want a woman to take it for granted, and to act like it's something they SHOULD do, I guess.

 

Right. I think she likely has many other issues as well -- for instance, while men generally paid for early dates quite enthusiastically, I never expect, suggest, or even want to go to any pricey restaurants, which I anticipate the OP frequents and so forth. Money is much more of an issue among the materialistic, IME.

 

No straight man out there cares about your shoes, your manicure, your pedicure, whether you shape your eyebrows yourself or get them professionally done (I watch my girlfriend pluck her eyebrows all the time and it's an extremely easy, if slightly painful, thing to do), what store you bought your dress and purse from, if your legs are shaved or if you get the hair professionally zapped off. Women who choose the more expensive options are flat out deluding themselves if they think it makes a lick of difference to the men they date.

 

The thing is, the expensive option may or may not make a difference, depending on how different it looks. I have frizzy hair. I live in place that is fairly humid in the summer. Therefore, I spend the money on some kind of straightening (Keratin, at the moment, because it's much cheaper and more "uniform" where I live than Japanese straightening, which I prefer -- but both are costly) for the summer months. I'm sure hubby, being who HE is, would still love me with frizzy hair, but many, many, many men would certainly "care" if my hair looked how it naturally looks. And no cheapie drug store or even expensive salon product is going to do what those salon treatments do. I know because I've tried.

 

Just as many men DO care about the quality of your bikini wax honestly (I know this one firsthand because I cannot shave without injuring myself down there or getting ingrown hairs or something painful -- tried so many times; not trying again -- so I Nair and trim; I used to wax, and my BF at the time liked that much better and DID allude to complaints with the new lower-cost beauty routine; again, a man like hubby doesn't care).

 

I don't necessarily "do" upkeep for men, because I don't believe in such things -- just as I have no plan to "stay attractive" for my husband nor do I think anyone is really that duty-bound to do so; your looks are your own, and the things I choose are for myself. But my point is mostly twofold:

 

1. a man who is the high-maintenance equivalent of the OP is probably going to care, even if he doesn't know "what it takes" to stay in tip-top shape, he has probably been accustomed to a woman who does put the time, effort, and $$$ into that. So, I think "no men care" is irrelevant. Men LIKE YOU may not care, but there are men that do -- that will notice a chipped nail or the difference between shaved or waxed legs or so forth.

 

2. You either have no expectations on looks or you have expectations. The fact that one girl has naturally unfrizzy hair while I have to pay a few hundred bucks for the privilege isn't something I'd ever consider fussing about, but when men say, "Women do these things; men don't expect them," they're ignoring the reality that men react to beauty, and beauty can be augmented. As long as some women are augmenting their beauty, others will have to in order to keep up. That's how it works. I'm okay if we do away with all of it -- I'd still do some things, but I wouldn't do the hair straightening, as sitting in the chair for hours is more annoying than the cost -- but we cannot decide to. Society is what it is.

 

Unlike the OP, I don't think getting a bikini wax entitles me to a free dinner, however (unless I bought a Groupon or something for 'free dinner with a bikini wax!' ) but I know many men who do appreciate the time, effort, and money women put into such things, and I certainly think such an attitude is better than, "I expect you to be hairless! And here's the cheap way I've decided you shall go about it! You're ridiculous if you pick another way!" etc that sometimes gets spewed -- because not only are you expecting something then but you're dictating how you expect it to be done. To me, that's like the OP saying not only does she expect the guy to pay for dinner, but she wants it paid in cash. It's just ADDING a parameter, not removing one.

Edited April 4, 2012 by zengirl

[AlexDP]

Yes, I agree with you. Thank you for understanding! And you're right, i've been deemed a gold-digger more than I can count, all because I think a man should pay on dates. It's so frustrating. They just don't get it.

 

Why? It doesn't make any sense whatsoever. I enjoy the company of the girl I'm with, she enjoys mine. 50/50 it is.

[Negative Nancy]

Why? It doesn't make any sense whatsoever. I enjoy the company of the girl I'm with, she enjoys mine. 50/50 it is.

 

I don't get it either, it's just food and drinks. What exactly does it prove if he pays?

 

I either go dutch or take turns, even when in a relationship and I just don't understand the concept or mentality of expecting the man to pay for stuff like dinner. It's just food, seriously...anyone can buy that stuff, it doesn't say anything about good qualities in a man...appreciation is shown in other ways

Edited April 4, 2012 by Negative Nancy

[Els]

You made my point so much more eloquently than I could, zengirl.

 

 

Unlike the OP, I don't think getting a bikini wax entitles me to a free dinner, however (unless I bought a Groupon or something for 'free dinner with a bikini wax!' ) but I know many men who do appreciate the time, effort, and money women put into such things, and I certainly think such an attitude is better than, "I expect you to be hairless! And here's the cheap way I've decided you shall go about it! You're ridiculous if you pick another way!" etc that sometimes gets spewed -- because not only are you expecting something then but you're dictating how you expect it to be done. To me, that's like the OP saying not only does she expect the guy to pay for dinner, but she wants it paid in cash. It's just ADDING a parameter, not removing one.

 

Precisely! Because, after all, the men of yesteryear did not have the extravagant luxury of using credit cards to pay for dinner.

[InJest]

NOOOOOOOOOOOOO it not!! Just as an experiment, do it to the next girl you introduce yourself too. Now watch her melt. It might be cheesy, but since it's so uncommon and almost extinct, if you start doing it again it will be a grand gesture.

 

I know I loved it last weekend when I met an Italian. For them it's a common/normal thing to do. I honestly felt like such a lady, and in my eyes he was such a man. We exchanged contact info.

 

FS, I try not to call people out of their names, but you are a delusional, ****ing retard.

 

Why was this the only part of Kaylan's post that you responded to? I thought he had a really objective assessment of why you don't get what you want. I'll echo it. You are the common denominator. You want to be treated like you're special, but you are not special. What do you have going for you, that someone should treat you special? I suspect the answer is nothing, which is everyone agrees you have a sense of entitlement..you want something for nothing.

 

And you've still never given us a picture. I still have the image of a butt ugly Amazon, with maybe some nice long hair or something. I have no problem being honest, if you're hot I'll say so, if not, well I don't think there's any question that I'll also say so.

[TheBigQuestion]

 

Unlike the OP, I don't think getting a bikini wax entitles me to a free dinner, however (unless I bought a Groupon or something for 'free dinner with a bikini wax!' ) but I know many men who do appreciate the time, effort, and money women put into such things, and I certainly think such an attitude is better than, "I expect you to be hairless! And here's the cheap way I've decided you shall go about it! You're ridiculous if you pick another way!" etc that sometimes gets spewed -- because not only are you expecting something then but you're dictating how you expect it to be done. To me, that's like the OP saying not only does she expect the guy to pay for dinner, but she wants it paid in cash. It's just ADDING a parameter, not removing one.

 

Honestly, if someone DOES take the expensive route for their beauty routines, I won't find it personally irritating at all. You live however you want to live. What I take issue with is the implication that the reason women spend so much more money on clothes, shoes, accessories, and beauty routines than the typical man is because men expect them to do so. In most cases, this simply isn't true. I know you didn't really mention shoes, but I'll use it as an example. I don't know a straight man who can tell one shoe brand from another just by looking at them. I'm having trouble thinking of any ladies' shoe designers names as I write this. Yet there are women who will swear up and down that this sort of thing will actually matter to a man. Again, with the narrow exception of highly metrosexual men, it simply isn't true. A man night 'notice' a chipped nail, but it doesn't follow that he expects the woman to have an expensive manicure. A man might appreciate a nice pair of heels on a woman, but it doesn't follow that he expects the woman to own 30 pairs of them.

 

As far as body hair goes, there may be a base expectation that men have, but again, it doesn't follow that they believe that it needs to be perfect/100% clean at all times.

 

Really the only point I'm trying to make is that if you enjoy spending money on your appearance, that's great. Just don't bitch about how expensive it is (not saying you are) because the vast majority of men would think you're just fine if you took the cheaper route to achieve the same result. In case you haven't noticed, no guy here is insisting that women should keep their beauty routines identical while simultaneously cutting costs. No guy here has ever said they've demanded that sort of thing in a relationship either. I'm not insisting on adding new parameters, I'm merely pointing out that alternatives exist.

Edited April 4, 2012 by TheBigQuestion

[dasein]

If you really want a good understanding of this read this The Futurist: The Misandry Bubble.

 

Thanks. The part of that link I find most interesting, is the treatment by mainline feminism of Sarah Palin and other accomplished women from the right. To clarify, I'm not a Republican, and wouldn't likely vote for Palin, as I feel she may fall into the category "establishment rightist" that I don't agree with politically any more than I agree with the left.

 

However, here is a supremely accomplished woman who has done more in her life than I have, and likely will accomplish more than I will in the future. I respect anyone who reaches such a level of accomplishment in a legitimate way, as she has, and believe that they are to be taken seriously and paid respect, whether one agrees with them or not.

 

The amount of raw, bitter hatred (and I don't use the terms "bitter" or "hatred" lightly as toss off insults as so many do today and especially here on LS) directed at Sarah Palin from mainstream feminists is outrageous. Anyone who disgrees give me an excuse to post links and I will do so. The level of disparagement of her by -feminists- shocks the conscience.

 

Now if feminism was what so many say it is, here and elsewhere, the empowerment of women, the celebration of women, the equality of women, then Sarah Palin would be a feminist icon. If feminism weren't in actuality plain leftist political dogma, then it wouldn't matter her beliefs, her level of accomplishment would be heralded as exemplary by feminists, and she would be an obvious feminist role model whether or not she self-identifies with feminism or not.

 

But of course, that's not how things play out is it? Feminism is a leftist political dogma wholly designed to solidify a leftist female voting bloc. Powerful, accomplished women from the right need not apply, and this thoroughly debunks what many self-proclaimed feminists here and elsewhere say feminism is.

[musemaj11]

Equal opportunity ensures that men have less money to spend on women and women have less men who have plenty of extra money to spend on them.

 

If anything, Affirmative Action should be awarded to men. That way everyone is happy.

 

I could understand if back in the days women expected to be monetarily dependent because they had less freedom to develop financially. But now, a woman can also have whatever I can have. We have the same opportunity. Therefore its simply sexism to still expect me to bear extra financial burden because of my gender.

Edited April 4, 2012 by musemaj11

[TheBigQuestion]

Thanks. The part of that link I find most interesting, is the treatment by mainline feminism of Sarah Palin and other accomplished women from the right. To clarify, I'm not a Republican, and wouldn't likely vote for Palin, as I feel she may fall into the category "establishment rightist" that I don't agree with politically any more than I agree with the left.

 

However, here is a supremely accomplished woman who has done more in her life than I have, and likely will accomplish more than I will in the future. I respect anyone who reaches such a level of accomplishment in a legitimate way, as she has, and believe that they are to be taken seriously and paid respect, whether one agrees with them or not.

 

The amount of raw, bitter hatred (and I don't use the terms "bitter" or "hatred" lightly as toss off insults as so many do today and especially here on LS) directed at Sarah Palin from mainstream feminists is outrageous. Anyone who disgrees give me an excuse to post links and I will do so. The level of disparagement of her by -feminists- shocks the conscience.

 

Now if feminism was what so many say it is, here and elsewhere, the empowerment of women, the celebration of women, the equality of women, then Sarah Palin would be a feminist icon. If feminism weren't in actuality plain leftist political dogma, then it wouldn't matter her beliefs, her level of accomplishment would be heralded as exemplary by feminists, and she would be an obvious feminist role model whether or not she self-identifies with feminism or not.

 

But of course, that's not how things play out is it? Feminism is a leftist political dogma wholly designed to solidify a leftist female voting bloc. Powerful, accomplished women from the right need not apply, and this thoroughly debunks what many self-proclaimed feminists here and elsewhere say feminism is.

 

Well yeah, of course feminists would despise Sarah Palin. Feminism is an inherently leftist ideology. Palin is a socially conservative, religious right-wing ideologue. I've seen feminist critiques of her, but most people criticize her because she's a moron, plain and simple. She had to transfer repeatedly to be able to graduate with a communications degree. She would not have made it far in politics if she didn't penetrate the very small and insular world of Alaskan government. What does it take to become mayor of a tiny Alaskan town?

She had no business being a VP nominee (she didn't know why Korea was divided into a North and South!) but essentially made everything all about her and failed to realize that she was making a complete and utter mockery of the political process. She's never been able to answer a question without going into non sequiturs. Most of her "followers" are dimwitted lemmings. She is essentially a reality TV star, the Snooki of the political world, and she is lambasted on a regular basis because of this far more than for her political beliefs.

 

To say that she's accomplished is to insult to people who actually have accomplished something. I suppose Kim Kardashian has "accomplished" something too? They're essentially the same person.

Edited April 4, 2012 by TheBigQuestion

[dasein]

Well yeah, of course feminists would despise Sarah Palin. Feminism is an inherently leftist ideology.

 

Wait a minute, I thought it was merely the belief that women should be treated equally legally and in all aspects of life? Or at least that's what so many feminists here say.

 

Palin is a socially conservative, religious right-wing ideologue.

 

Once again, regardless of rationalization, she was the governor of a state. Once you have reached that level of accomplishment in your life, get back to me with the standard media soundbites and lambasting leveled at her. Until then...

 

And as far as the foibles of U.S. politicians generally, their fitness for office, regardless of ideology, you are preaching to the choir. And we are all to blame for that, not just the clowns we elect. Someone had to elect them.

 

But trying to fit a larger size of clownshoe onto Palin than fits the near entirety of the U.S. governing body is an exercise in futility. If the clownshoe fits, they all gotta wear it. Don't try to single her out as being some particularly hideous aberration in U.S. politics in a literal sea of aberrations.

[FrustratedStandards]

*Funny, I don’t see any complaints about the sexual revolution in this thread.

 

The complaint would be that there are more sl*ts than normal women.

 

Agreed. I honestly think the reason OP is having trouble is because she feels she is entitled to it, and doesn't mince about that. Most guys I know who do this sort of stuff, want to be appreciated for it. They don't want a woman to take it for granted, and to act like it's something they SHOULD do, I guess.

 

Not true. I ALWAYS say thank you, and men are so surprised by it, probably because by the looks of it they think I feel "entitled" to it, but when they see I actually appreciate the gesture, they think differently.

 

I've had men express surprise at my thanking them for things they've done or bought for me. It seems that women they dated previously seldom did. Such a simple gesture that costs nothing yet means so much. Men aren't that difficult to please, ladies.

 

EXACTLY! Thank you.