Feminism and real men.

[dasein]

I was referring to your user name. Guess you don't realize how much BS Heidegger has produced.

 

Get back to me when I start peppering my posts ad nausea with besorgen, thrownness, bestanden, ontic, esse essentia, esse existentia, existentiale, etc. Or make a thread about Heidegger's BS and we can certainly discuss it.

[Sid6.7]

I never said men are rapist by nature. Certain cultures have certainly turned their men into monsters(burning schools with girls in it in afghanestan anyone?). I'm sure there are some in which women are monsters in it too, I cant think of any in this day and age at least. I just hate how ignorant people in their parents basement who has probably never gone anywhere else make ignorant statements.

 

And other cultures are turning Men into pussy's. Mainly ours.

[udolipixie]

@wholigan, She -believes- what she posted, obvious from the above, meant to post it, does endorse it, and chose to do so in lieu of many less inflammatory options.

 

@udolipixie, yet you don't cite. You can't because you know from whence such misandry issues, and don't want the source and the lie exposed for what they are.

You stated I can't cite something and I stated I could cite something. That's not stating I believe or endorse the citation that's stating I can provide the citation. As I've repeatedly said I didn't cite when asked because when show factual evidence or research you dislike you often dismiss stating feminism or diminish/excuse it. Interesting how without me even citing it you followed the behavior pattern I stated you tend to do dismiss it by stating feminism and diminishing it.

 

'from whence such misandry issues'?

Edited May 26, 2012 by udolipixie

[udolipixie]

udolipixie accuse most men of raping if they could and just cause some bad ones did doesn't mean most would.

No I did not.

 

I stated many studies consistently shown the majority of guys will rape if there's no consquences. I said nothing about whether I believe such.

 

I included that studies bit in a turnaround to show another user that having similiar experiences doesn't mean when someone makes a definitive statement or rule they're not completely wrong.

 

Listen, I was raised by a single mother and I am hopeless with women. Coincidence? Maybe, but he's not completely wrong.

Many studies have consistently shown that the majority of guys will rape if there's no consequences so I suppose it maybe a coincidence it's not completely wrong that the majority of guys will rape given the opportunity.

 

I know many gals who dated black guys and encountered far more sexism than other races so I suppose it maybe a coincidence but they're not completely wrong that black guys are the most sexist race.

[udolipixie]

Maybe so, but it was still a very tactless post - look at the carnage it caused .

 

Let us at least acknowledge the legitimacy of the claim about men raised by single mothers. It does not come from a place of malice, or even widespread truth, but is a probable side effect that may or may not arise.

 

Your point about having male role models outside of the father has credence, as I know a lot of guys who thrive under such circumstances, but consider the male who has poor role models instead, and only has women in his life. How does he reconcile his masculinity? And furthermore, how does he define masculinity?

 

I'm going to ask you a question, it might sound silly but I'm curious: Do you think of masculinity as bad? How would you, as a young woman, define it in your eyes? Don't worry, I have my own definition as a man, I just want to hear yours.

Though no carnage for the cultural slander basically a claim that all or most black guys are sexist and more sexist than guys of other races?

 

I did acknowledge the legitimacy I was on the logistics of it seemingly not being applicable to single fathers and two units. As well as the logistics of having similiar experiences doesn't mean when someone makes a definitive statement or rule they're not completely wrong. Nowhere did I state, suggest, or imply that the single mothers bit came from a place of malice. Though the a poster's definitive statement/rule about it does suggest to me it comes from a place of widespread truth.

 

The guy who has poor male role models would probably be best suited to reconcile his humanity first then gender identity by considering what type of person he wishes to be (honorable, loyal, faithful, deceptive, manipulative). I'm of a "be a person first be a gender second" mindset. He'd define his masculinity by choosing throle he sees available for his gender though dynamic he desires in a romantic/sexual relationship if he wants such.

 

As for your curiousity I don't think of masculinity as bad as it's generally defined as 'possessing qualities or characteristics considered typical of or appropriate to a man'. It's a concept and things such as concepts/groups aren't good or bad to me unless it's definition is what I see as hurting children or animals. So masculinity isn't bad to me as I see no hurting children or animals, NAMBLA is bad to me as I see child molesters as hurting children.

 

I'd define masculinity as 'possessing qualities or characteristics considered typical of or appropriate to a man'.

[dasein]

You stated I can't cite something and I stated I could cite something.

 

Yet you don't, in post after post. It's one thing to generalize about the opposite sex on a dating board, quite another to claim that "studies" support that a majority of men are by nature violent sex criminals. Put up or shut up.

[udolipixie]

Yet you don't, in post after post. It's one thing to generalize about the opposite sex on a dating board, quite another to claim that "studies" support that a majority of men are by nature violent sex criminals. Put up or shut up.

I've repeatedly stated I didn't cite because when show factual evidence or research you dislike you often dismiss stating feminism or diminish/excuse it. Even without citing it you followed the behavior pattern I stated you tend to do dismiss it by stating feminism and diminish it.

 

Perhaps you'd be better suited to do the latter part of 'put up or shut up'.

[Cracker Jack]

Could I see these studies, then? I really want to see them.

[Sid6.7]

 

 

 

The guy who has poor male role models would probably be best suited to reconcile his humanity first then gender identity by considering what type of person he wishes to be (honorable, loyal, faithful, deceptive, manipulative).

 

This is to assume these traits are ingrained in him by a single mother during infancy and into adolescence, the traits a female does not generally possess. By that time the 'damage' has been done. As we all know, a women teaches womanly instincts, they want to nest, nurture and things of that nature. The confusion set in by these chain of events by a single mother can be devastating for a born male growing into teen-age years, including up an into adulthood without the presence of a Father.

 

In many instances single mothers are bitter and sometimes find Men superlative in their teachings in regards to a young aging boy.

[dasein]

I've repeatedly stated I didn't cite because when show factual evidence or research you dislike you often dismiss stating feminism or diminish/excuse it. Even without citing it you followed the behavior pattern I stated you tend to do dismiss it by stating feminism and diminish it.

 

OK, cite the studies and I won't comment on them, even if they come from NOW, Jezebel, French, Solanas, Dworkin or Greer... hell it can even be some nutter's blog. I have every confidence that readers here are perfectly capable of determining their worth and validity, or lack thereof, without any comment from me at all.

 

Anxious to hear the next excuse for not citing sources of an extremely inflammatory factual claim you posted.

[Sid6.7]

What the hell happened? That wasn't udolipixie I quoted.

 

Edit: Oh, wait. It was.

Edited May 26, 2012 by Sid6.7

[udolipixie]

This is to assume these traits are ingrained in him by a single mother during infancy and into adolescence, the traits a female does not generally possess. By that time the 'damage' has been done. As we all know, a women teaches womanly instincts, they want to nest, nurture and things of that nature. The confusion set in by these chain of events by a single mother can be devastating for a born male growing into teen-age years, including up an into adulthood without the presence of a Father.

 

In many instances single mothers are bitter and sometimes find Men superlative in their teachings in regards to a young aging boy.

 

How is a guy considering what a type of person he wants to be to assume the traits are ingrained in him by a single mother during infancy and into adolescence?

 

As well as how did you get that what he considers are traits generally not found in gals? I didn't state any traits other than my own throwoffs of examples of what type a person he may want to be. I'm fairly sure honor, loyal, faithful, deceptive, and manipulative are traits generally found in people.

 

To me stating 'the guy who has poor male role models would probably be best suited to reconcile his humanity first then gender identity by considering what type of person he wishes to be' is assuming he'll do an assessment of the traits of what he desires to be and seek out how to develop them.

[udolipixie]

OK, cite the studies and I won't comment on them, even if they come from NOW, Jezebel, French, Solanas, Dworkin or Greer... hell it can even be some nutter's blog. I have every confidence that readers here are perfectly capable of determining their worth and validity, or lack thereof, without any comment from me at all.

 

Anxious to hear the next excuse for not citing sources of an extremely inflammatory factual claim you posted.

I did cite the studies just not to you. That 'even if they come from bit' shows why I no longer cite to you as you tend to state feminism and diminish/excuse what doesn't suit you even doing so without knowing the sources.

 

To you and others who think like you it's an extremely inflammatory factual claim to state the results of studies. To me it's be an extremely inflammatory factual claim to tout the results as definitive truths or facts which is something I did not state, suggest, or imply. In fact I implied the opposite of the studies results.

Listen, I was raised by a single mother and I am hopeless with women. Coincidence? Maybe, but he's not completely wrong.

Many studies have consistently shown that the majority of guys will rape if there's no consequences so I suppose it maybe a coincidence it's not completely wrong that the majority of guys will rape given the opportunity.

 

I know many gals who dated black guys and encountered far more sexism than other races so I suppose it maybe a coincidence but they're not completely wrong that black guys are the most sexist race.

[Crusoe]

The assumption that guys with a single mother don't have a man to teach them how to be men overlooks the possiblity of grandfathers, uncles, male cousins, male teachers, and male role models.

 

A boy needs a full time father. No grandfather, cousin, or teacher can properly fulfil that role. Neither can a woman. No matter how well intentioned, she has absolutely no experience of being a boy or a man. To deny a boy a full time father in the belief that he doesn't need one is little short of cruelty.

[joystickd]

Udolipixie totally ignores the role of a father. Its easy from the outside looking in to say grandfather, uncle, cousin, or any male relative can substitute but that connection and role doesn't compare to an actual father.

1. father/mother relationship is the very first relationship a child see in its life. the interaction between those to set the tone for boys and girls in future relationships.

2. fathers are important to women. how he treats her will affect her relationship with men throughout her teenage and adult life. she looks to him for affection, respect and affirmation of her femininity. if he provides these things for her, she will usually expect the same type of treatment from the males in her life later on - in other words, she isn't likely to tolerate men who behave disrespectfully or abusively toward her.

think about number two there. feminism would never existed if fathers meaning men that were shown to be men by their fathers that instilled certain values in their daughters not by men that as you put it: reconcile his humanity first then gender identity by considering what type of person he wishes to be' is assuming he'll do an assessment of the traits of what he desires to be and seek out how to develop them. That will never work. Does a doctor reconcile their humanity then career path by considering what traits are needed to be an MD? No they learn from other doctors.

 

Now to what OP is talking about I say yes I believe it has contributed to it but their are other factors involved. I will say the gender war has created this fear of being honest about desires on both sides.

[Woggle]

Fathers also matter in a woman's life. It is easy to tell when dating which women had a positive father relationship in their life and which ones didn't.

 

If some radical feminists had their way fathers would donate the sperm, send the check and then stay out of a child's life.

[kaylan]

I have been thinking alot about this, i live in a small country, 300.000 people.

 

The chances for a girl to be asked on a date (at day time) , are the same as winning the lottery. Random people never go on dates here.

 

People go down town, get drunk, go home together and if there is more interest they exchange numbers.

 

It´s like men treat flirting, like walking on eggshell. We are born to put women on pedistal and care more about her feelings that our own.

 

Has feminism cut off mens balls and made them into weak boys with no backbone?

Feminism didnt do this. Look into the history of your culture. I think youll find more answers. Because feminism has swept through many countries, especially the US...and guys here will be bold and daring if they wanna be.

Many studies have consistently shown that the majority of guys will rape if there's no consequences so I suppose it maybe a coincidence it's not completely wrong that the majority of guys will rape given the opportunity.

Source? Multiple would be nice.

Edited May 26, 2012 by kaylan

[udolipixie]

A boy needs a full time father. No grandfather, cousin, or teacher can properly fulfil that role. Neither can a woman. No matter how well intentioned, she has absolutely no experience of being a boy or a man. To deny a boy a full time father in the belief that he doesn't need one is little short of cruelty.[/QUOTE]

 

Nowhere do I state, suggest, or imply that guys should be denied a full time father in the belief that he doesn't need one.

 

I do state that saying a guy with a single mother has no man to teach him how to be one overlooks other guys in his life that are likely consistent forces.

[udolipixie]

Udolipixie totally ignores the role of a father. Its easy from the outside looking in to say grandfather, uncle, cousin, or any male relative can substitute but that connection and role doesn't compare to an actual father.

1. father/mother relationship is the very first relationship a child see in its life. the interaction between those to set the tone for boys and girls in future relationships.

 

2. fathers are important to women. how he treats her will affect her relationship with men throughout her teenage and adult life. she looks to him for affection, respect and affirmation of her femininity. if he provides these things for her, she will usually expect the same type of treatment from the males in her life later on - in other words, she isn't likely to tolerate men who behave disrespectfully or abusively toward her.

think about number two there. feminism would never existed if fathers meaning men that were shown to be men by their fathers that instilled certain values in their daughters not by men that as you put it: reconcile his humanity first then gender identity by considering what type of person he wishes to be' is assuming he'll do an assessment of the traits of what he desires to be and seek out how to develop them. That will never work. Does a doctor reconcile their humanity then career path by considering what traits are needed to be an MD? No they learn from other doctors.

It's not totally ignoring the role of the father it's overlooking other men when one states a guy with a single mother has no man to teach him how to be one. It's stating one is ignoring other possible male role models.

 

Nowhere did I state, suggest, or imply that other male relatives can susbstitute or compare the connection or role. I did state that a guy with a single mother does likely have males in him life to teach him how to be one. A child can be taught plenty of things from those that aren't his/her parents however that doesn't necessarily mean the connection and role is substitute or compares.

 

Your doctor comparison is quite a logical leap and strawman argument to me as masculinity a concept is quite different from a designated occupation with legally required skills, experience, and education. It's X = doctor while X, Y, X+Z, or A can equal man.

 

A person who wanted to be a doctor wouldn't be reconciling thier humanity and considering traits because that's irrelevant to being an MD as there's a set criteria and expectations to be considered a doctor. They could reconcile their humanity and consider traits to what kind of doctor they wish to be (impersonal, arrogrant, assuming, kind, gentle).

[zengirl]

Listen, I was raised by a single mother and I am hopeless with women. Coincidence? Maybe, but he's not completely wrong. Most of the guys I know who are good with women or at least comfortable with their own masculinity however expressed, have some kind of good relationship with their father. My own relationship with my dad has been progressive, although at the start nonexistent as I didn't see him often. I am only now starting to have some kind of confidence as a result. Again, maybe a coincidence. But I wouldn't rule out the possibility of my father's influence having a positive effect.

 

I'm not getting involved in the majority of this thread, as it's the same old, same old. However, THIS is actually interesting.

 

TW, I agree wholeheartedly that father figures are often crucial to men developing the skills needed for romantic and often social success. Certainly father figures don't have to be fathers in all cases, but every male figure is not a father figure. I also know men who didn't have father figures, but were forced to become father figures at younger ages, to younger siblings, etc, and have the same set of skills as a result of it. There is something to this phenomenon.

 

Obviously, mother-figures are important as well -- and women without mother-figures have similar issues, TBH, as far as I've observed -- and father-figures are important to girls and mother-figures to boys. That doesn't necessarily require a 2-parent household or any set configuration, but it is something worth looking at so we can help the many children who don't have BOTH figures in their lives at present become adults who still feel whole.

 

I will say that I've (seriously) dated very few men in my life who had good relationships with their fathers. Some had father-figures and some did not. Hubby gets along with his father now, but he doesn't see him as a "Dad" and didn't have him growing up. Most of the other men I've dated either came from similar homes, with kind of distant fathers, or just didn't really 'get' or get along with their Dad as kids. A lot of them had reconciled with their Dads later in life, but most of them had forged other male relationships (whether peer or mentor) and found father figures elsewhere. I do think that works too, though I've not seen many studies on the phenomenon. It's a new trend in adolescent development, so I think we may soon.

 

I don't think we can blame "feminism" for the lack of father-figures, though, as a subset of men have experienced it throughout time, especially as the mothers typically raised the children. In fact, there seems to be some evidence that in a more egalitarian world, where mothers and fathers are BOTH active parents, rather than mothers being a homemaker, that boys develop STRONGER relationships with their fathers. An absentee father CAN still live in the house, and I met many men who had no relationship with a man who slept 2 rooms away from them because he was never home, etc. There are various forms of absentee fathers, and many young men in the past had runaway fathers or fathers who were killed, etc, long before the modern age. However, communities and families being stronger, they probably suffered the loss less than we do today because someone else stepped into that role.

[Woggle]

You say that as if it's a bad thing.

 

The sad thing is I don't know whether you are joking or not and that is why I can't support feminism.

[joystickd]

It's not totally ignoring the role of the father it's overlooking other men when one states a guy with a single mother has no man to teach him how to be one. It's stating one is ignoring other possible male role models.

 

Nowhere did I state, suggest, or imply that other male relatives can susbstitute or compare the connection or role. I did state that a guy with a single mother does likely have males in him life to teach him how to be one. A child can be taught plenty of things from those that aren't his/her parents however that doesn't necessarily mean the connection and role is substitute or compares.

 

Your doctor comparison is quite a logical leap and strawman argument to me as masculinity a concept is quite different from a designated occupation with legally required skills, experience, and education. It's X = doctor while X, Y, X+Z, or A can equal man.

 

A person who wanted to be a doctor wouldn't be reconciling thier humanity and considering traits because that's irrelevant to being an MD as there's a set criteria and expectations to be considered a doctor. They could reconcile their humanity and consider traits to what kind of doctor they wish to be (impersonal, arrogrant, assuming, kind, gentle).

What you said could easily be interpreted as that. Who gives a f**k about strawman. You just say that to negate the fact that essentially someone has to teach you to be a man no reconciling or considering could even be possible unless someone is there to teach. There is the possibility of other male teaching but none compare to the father. The reason I even used that was because essentially a doctor has to teach you to be a doctor. That was the logic behind that and if you didn't get it then you have some serious issues. Like I said before example of healthy relationships with women and feminism has a foundation of fathers taught by men that instilled certain values in their daughters because the first dealings a woman has with the opposite sex is her father and that sets the tone for her future relationships with men.

 

Say whatever you want you negate the role of fathers and quote statistics with no references. If I wanted I could pull stuff out of my a$$ like you did but I'm not.

[joystickd]

I'm not getting involved in the majority of this thread, as it's the same old, same old. However, THIS is actually interesting.

 

TW, I agree wholeheartedly that father figures are often crucial to men developing the skills needed for romantic and often social success. Certainly father figures don't have to be fathers in all cases, but every male figure is not a father figure. I also know men who didn't have father figures, but were forced to become father figures at younger ages, to younger siblings, etc, and have the same set of skills as a result of it. There is something to this phenomenon.

 

Obviously, mother-figures are important as well -- and women without mother-figures have similar issues, TBH, as far as I've observed -- and father-figures are important to girls and mother-figures to boys. That doesn't necessarily require a 2-parent household or any set configuration, but it is something worth looking at so we can help the many children who don't have BOTH figures in their lives at present become adults who still feel whole.

 

I will say that I've (seriously) dated very few men in my life who had good relationships with their fathers. Some had father-figures and some did not. Hubby gets along with his father now, but he doesn't see him as a "Dad" and didn't have him growing up. Most of the other men I've dated either came from similar homes, with kind of distant fathers, or just didn't really 'get' or get along with their Dad as kids. A lot of them had reconciled with their Dads later in life, but most of them had forged other male relationships (whether peer or mentor) and found father figures elsewhere. I do think that works too, though I've not seen many studies on the phenomenon. It's a new trend in adolescent development, so I think we may soon.

 

I don't think we can blame "feminism" for the lack of father-figures, though, as a subset of men have experienced it throughout time, especially as the mothers typically raised the children. In fact, there seems to be some evidence that in a more egalitarian world, where mothers and fathers are BOTH active parents, rather than mothers being a homemaker, that boys develop STRONGER relationships with their fathers. An absentee father CAN still live in the house, and I met many men who had no relationship with a man who slept 2 rooms away from them because he was never home, etc. There are various forms of absentee fathers, and many young men in the past had runaway fathers or fathers who were killed, etc, long before the modern age. However, communities and families being stronger, they probably suffered the loss less than we do today because someone else stepped into that role.

Even though they may have other male figures there will always be that void of not having a father

[udolipixie]

What you said could easily be interpreted as that.

 

Who gives a f**k about strawman. You just say that to negate the fact that essentially someone has to teach you to be a man no reconciling or considering could even be possible unless someone is there to teach. There is the possibility of other male teaching but none compare to the father. The reason I even used that was because essentially a doctor has to teach you to be a doctor. That was the logic behind that and if you didn't get it then you have some serious issues. Like I said before example of healthy relationships with women and feminism has a foundation of fathers taught by men that instilled certain values in their daughters because the first dealings a woman has with the opposite sex is her father and that sets the tone for her future relationships with men.

 

Say whatever you want you negate the role of fathers and quote statistics with no references. If I wanted I could pull stuff out of my a$$ like you did but I'm not.

 

It's not negating the fathers role to me that stating guys with single mothers have no man to teach him how to be a man is overlooking other male figures in his life such as grandfathers, uncles, male cousins, andmale role models. It's negating that there the rule is guys with single mothers have no man in his life to teach him how to be a man.

 

Saying strawman is to negate a faulty comparison that seems to based on intrepretation rather than the meaning as it's a strawman argument to me to compare an intrepretation of X to Y rather than X to Y.

 

Your 'logic' has the fallacy that masculinity is a concept while a doctor has a designated expected set of criteria as it's takes X to be a doctor while X, Y, X+Z, or A can be a man. I think you have some serious issues if you can't see the fallacy in stating your point is 'a doctor has to teach you to be a doctor' when I'm stating there are likely men in the boy's life to teach him so he does have a man to teach him to be a man. A point that would actually counter would be stating only 'a father can teach his son to be a father' or 'only a father can teach his son to be a man'.

 

I didn't quote statistics as I gave no figures I stated many studies have consistently shown as a turnaround to show that having similiar experiences doesn't mean a definitive definitive statement or rule they're not completely wrong. I didn't expect to be provide citations for something I was using to show what I saw as faulty reasoning. Especially as I wasn't endorsing it, believing it, claiming a fact about it, making a generalization about it, or making an argument about it. I did cite the studies just not to you.

Edited May 26, 2012 by udolipixie

[joystickd]

It's not negating the fathers role to me that stating guys with single mothers have no man to teach him how to be a man is overlooking other male figures in his life such as grandfathers, uncles, male cousins, andmale role models. It's negating that there the rule is guys with single mothers have no man in his life to teach him how to be a man.

 

Saying strawman is to negate a faulty comparison that seems to based on intrepretation rather than the meaning as it's a strawman argument to me to compare an intrepretation of X to Y rather than X to Y.

 

Your 'logic' has the fallacy that masculinity is a concept while a doctor has a designated expected set of criteria as it's takes X to be a doctor while X, Y, X+Z, or A can be a man. I think you have some serious issues if you can't see the fallacy in stating your point is 'a doctor has to teach you to be a doctor' when I'm stating there are likely men in the boy's life to teach him so he does have a man to teach him to be a man. A point that would actually counter would be stating only 'a father can teach his son to be a father' or 'only a father can teach his son to be a man'.

 

I didn't quote statistics as I gave no figures I stated many studies have consistently shown as a turnaround to show that having similiar experiences doesn't mean a definitive definitive statement or rule they're not completely wrong. I didn't expect to be provide citations for something I was using to show what I saw as faulty reasoning. Especially as I wasn't endorsing it, believing it, claiming a fact about it, making a generalization about it, or making an argument about it. I did cite the studies just not to you.

 

So me and the other people up here have the impression you pulled those studies out of your a$$. So next time put somet hing worth some value out of it. You can lmao but you are the joke. I know what a strawman is. If you would actually READ I said I don't give a f**k about.