Jump to content

The Art Of Being A Man


Recommended Posts

You become a man in childhood. Whatever you do as a grown man to become a MAN is an act, not the real thing.

 

Interesting view, So at what age do you think the door closes at your face, if you want to strive to become a man?.

Link to post
Share on other sites
You become a man in childhood. Whatever you do as a grown man to become a MAN is an act, not the real thing.

I don't understand you :confused: All you seem to do is come into threads and passively insult people.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Interesting view, So at what age do you think the door closes at your face, if you want to strive to become a man?.

 

The sooner the better. I suspect that by age 12 a boy is already predestined to either be a man or an imitation of a man. You must become a MAN when you are a clean slate and that is only possible in very early childhood.

 

If a person becomes a good man later in life it will be an act. It will be deliberate and will require considerable energy, therapy, and study. I am certain some can pull this act, but it is difficult and not the real thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't understand you :confused: All you seem to do is come into threads and passively insult people.

 

I am sorry to hear that.

 

Presenting a different point of view can be harsh, but i beg you not to take my words personally.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
I am sorry to hear that.

 

Presenting a different point of view can be harsh, but i beg you not to take my words personally.

:laugh:, don't worry I don't.

 

I just find it a little weird how you can assume that anyone who doesn't become a man at 12 YEARS OLD will never become a man in later life. That makes the assumption that everyone develops in life at the same time. Suppose a man becomes a man later in life and seamlessly slips into the role because he has slowly developed into it rather than imitating it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
:laugh:, don't worry I don't.

 

I just find it a little weird how you can assume that anyone who doesn't become a man at 12 YEARS OLD will never become a man in later life. That makes the assumption that everyone develops in life at the same time. Suppose a man becomes a man later in life and seamlessly slips into the role because he has slowly developed into it rather than imitating it?

 

Like i said above. It is possible and when it happens it deserves admiration. However, it requires work.

 

However, what comes natural to us is developed in childhood.

 

Most psych journals will say that our personality is developed in childhood.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Like i said above. It is possible and when it happens it deserves admiration. However, it requires work.

 

However, what comes natural to us is developed in childhood.

 

Most psych journals will say that our personality is developed in childhood.

Most psych journals can be tampered with or fabricated. Wakefield, anyone? :lmao:

 

This doesn't factor in the advent of neurodiversity. It could require work, but it could still possibly be naturally late development.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Disenchantedly Yours
I don't understand you :confused: All you seem to do is come into threads and passively insult people.

 

I never had that impression of him Wholigan. Sometimes I think you accuse people of taking shots they didn't take.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I never had that impression of him Wholigan. Sometimes I think you accuse people of taking shots they didn't take.

He's done it quite a few times in the multi-dating threads, I thought he was doing it here too. It IS a shot in my opinion, he's basically saying that any man who develops later than other men, is not a real man and is putting on an act. If I were a thin-skinned man, I would feel insulted. It is weird that someone would come into a thread such as this and say something that could be inflammatory.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's interesting that Pierre is pretending to be Sean Connery who was pretending to be James Bond. It's all an act.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think honor is something known only to men. Women may have their exclusive strengths, but I don't think I've met a women who knows what honor and codes are really all about; and what it means to not be swayed by shifting circumstances. It means you do what's gotta be done even if you're outnumbered by thousands.

Link to post
Share on other sites
How about be yourself and forget this noise.

 

Can I get a "how to be a woman" list, please? I am sure it includes some meme about making sandwiches and being passive and a beauty object to all eyeballs who happen to glance my way.

 

 

My father has a desire to be nurturing, but his presence is loud and stereotypically "alphamale". When I visit, the dog will rush over to me, start being clingy and affection-seeking - and then show reluctance when my dad calls it over so that he can pat it/emphasise "this is my dog."

 

He'll stand there looking bewildered and upset as the dog refuses to go over, even when I'm urging it to go over. "what's wrong with you? Stop being so stupid. Come over to me." I remember the same with my brother years back. We'd be sitting in the family home talking....me smothered with clinging, affection seeking animals (two dogs, one cat) while he sat there, arms folded and grim-faced, on an armchair. Billy No-Mates.

 

"What's their f*cking problem? Why are they trying to make me out to be some sort of bad bastard?"

 

As far as he was concerned, there was an animal conspiracy to portray him as an animal abuser, and I was colluding with it. He'd call out angrily for one of them to go over to him, and it would just cling even more closely to me. I had to teach him to speak gently, make his body language less threatening etc to get them to come over.

 

In later years when I was being sexually harassed by a creepy guy at work, he got me to go along to a martial arts class to learn more assertive body language...so it's quid pro quo. Aggressive men who would like closer relationships, and passive women who need to set boundaries between themselves and the affection or sex-starved, learn from eachother the different techniques you need in order to survive in a world where being all man or all woman just isn't enough to defeat the various obstacles life throws at you.

 

One of the problems I see on here is that men complain about not being good with women, and other men respond by advising them on how to be more masculine. Providing them with Manliness Lists. In some cases, the reality might be that they're already putting women off by displaying a lot of stereotypically male traits. Having cold/standoffish body language, failing to project warmth....or even demonstrating internal anger/aggression. Which is fine if their problem is "I feel vulnerable in a violent environment"...but not so handy if the problem is "women don't seem to want to be around me."

Edited by Taramere
Link to post
Share on other sites
He's done it quite a few times in the multi-dating threads, I thought he was doing it here too. It IS a shot in my opinion, he's basically saying that any man who develops later than other men, is not a real man and is putting on an act. If I were a thin-skinned man, I would feel insulted. It is weird that someone would come into a thread such as this and say something that could be inflammatory.

 

Putting on an act is not always a bad thing. In this instance it simply means that to behave like a man requires work. OTOH, for others it may be effortless and natural.

 

 

I agree with your concept of late development. Not everybody matures at the same time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Putting on an act is not always a bad thing. In this instance it simply means that to behave like a man requires work. OTOH, for others it may be effortless and natural.

 

 

I agree with your concept of late development. Not everybody matures at the same time.

I have a better understanding of your stance now. I wouldn't liken it to "putting on an act" as opposed to "augmenting your character". I also agree that some develop earlier than others, hence it appears more natural, and indeed effortless. I don't think a late developer is any less natural, unless one is trying to develop characteristics that directly counter his natural state of expression. I hear you though.

 

I'm happy to be proved wrong by you in this instance :).

Link to post
Share on other sites
I have a better understanding of your stance now. I wouldn't liken it to "putting on an act" as opposed to "augmenting your character". I also agree that some develop earlier than others, hence it appears more natural, and indeed effortless. I don't think a late developer is any less natural, unless one is trying to develop characteristics that directly counter his natural state of expression. I hear you though.

 

I'm happy to be proved wrong by you in this instance :).

 

I agree:cool:.

 

However, OP put it down as an acquired taste and that is possible, but difficult.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OP, I think you'll find that the higher one moves up on the 'food chain' that the rules of manners, class, communication skills and what one calls 'good breeding' are traits exhibited by both men and women equally... according to their chosen path in life.

 

Rather than focus on masculine vs feminine traits... may I suggest you pick up books on leadership instead... and learn how to 'flex' your personal style if you wish to be a 'leader' in your intimate relationships and in life.

 

It is a trait that I've heard call 'situational leadership'. The best have it. Men and women.

 

Along the way, hopefully you will observe that with leadership comes responsibility. It is the 'responsibility' part that I see is missing from your list. Except for the ethics/code. That is a good start.

 

good luck...

Link to post
Share on other sites
There is no doubt women are the more selfish and lose control of their emotions and do some incredibly cruel/dishonorable things, more often than men. Is it socialized or biological? Who knows, but it's no doubt women have really thin skins.

 

Your argument might have more weight if it were presented as your opinion, rather than fact.

 

I'll admit women tend to operate on a more emotional level than men, but it could be argued that this, specifically, is the reason why they are less selfish and cruel than men, could it not? A 'thin skin' - again, a pretty subjective notion, but - to me, implies more sensitivity. In this case, logic would suggest increased sympathy/empathy and a stronger inclination to kindness, in general, I'd have thought.

 

On a purely personal note, I find your choice of username and avatar cruel, so my emotional response to your comments, above, is akin to this: :eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites
It might sound like it's "misogynist", but I completely agree with you.

 

On average, women are not that much less intelligent than men. However subtle differences like this can be a big deal when it comes to how men and women relate to society and one another.

 

I think women are capable of a powerful and great loyalty to their children and even husband, but have trouble standing up against the crowd for what's right in the name of justice or heroism. It's uncommon to find a woman who, as Nietszche believed was basic in a Super man, "loves the struggle".

 

There is no doubt women are the more selfish and lose control of their emotions and do some incredibly cruel/dishonorable things, more often than men. Is it socialized or biological? Who knows, but it's no doubt women have really thin skins.

 

Even if you actually believe all this, that women are less intelligent, unheroic, selfish, and cruel compared to men, it still doesn't help in dealing with women in general, because every person is an individual, not a stereotype. So the woman you are talking to could be the one anomaly who is a brave selfless genius.

 

Holding onto generalities and stereotypes is incredibly limiting. Treating each person as an individual who has both strengths and weaknesses is a better way to approach dating (and life). If you find that a woman is cruel and stupid, you can walk away, but if you meet 20 women in a row who are cruel and stupid, you still have a responsibility to treat the 21st as an individual who may not be those things.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
It might sound like it's "misogynist", but I completely agree with you.

 

On average, women are not that much less intelligent than men. However subtle differences like this can be a big deal when it comes to how men and women relate to society and one another.

 

I think women are capable of a powerful and great loyalty to their children and even husband, but have trouble standing up against the crowd for what's right in the name of justice or heroism. It's uncommon to find a woman who, as Nietszche believed was basic in a Super man, "loves the struggle".

 

There is no doubt women are the more selfish and lose control of their emotions and do some incredibly cruel/dishonorable things, more often than men. Is it socialized or biological? Who knows, but it's no doubt women have really thin skins.

 

I would tend to agree as a whole women are a little less loyal and more a slave to their emotions

 

Ive seen women try to get with their mans friend because he made her laugh and thye bonded and made a human connection which in womans mind means soulmate if the physical attraction is also there

 

I think women are way more naive and socially aloof then men also

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for presenting your point of view as your point of view, however, I have some questions!

 

I would tend to agree as a whole women are a little less loyal and more a slave to their emotions

 

Less loyal to what? Being a 'slave to one's emotions' doesn't sound great, but neither does 'being a slave to logic', IMO. Women sometimes accuse men of the latter but I don't think the accusations, from either side, are especially productive.

 

Ive seen women try to get with their mans friend because he made her laugh and thye bonded and made a human connection which in womans mind means soulmate if the physical attraction is also there

 

This means you've witnessed some horrible behaviour from some females. You may have witnessed some questionable behaviour from men, as well? I coughed quite loudly at your suggestion that, if a woman feels any physical attraction for a man, who then makes her laugh, that this 'human connection' automatically means she views him as a soulmate. It makes me question the stability of the women you've met, nothing more.

 

I think women are way more naive and socially aloof then men also

 

Naive in what respect? Can you expand on 'socially aloof'?

Link to post
Share on other sites
On a purely personal note, I find your choice of username and avatar cruel, so my emotional response to your comments, above, is akin to this: :eek:

 

Probably something to do with following a certain ideology put forth by the National Socialists of Germany in the 30s and 40s.

 

I wholeheartedly disagree with most of them (they believed they were superior to everyone else, a classic case of eurocentricism that my race in particular are no stranger to), but a lot of people have ideologies that aren't agreeable to most people, just some more than others.

 

I have certain beliefs about things and heroes that people would think are crazy. In fact, I am the direct descendant (grandson) of a Black Rights Activist who was the 1st man to be arrested under the race relations act and has had his name disrespected over the years due to a crime he was executed that he didn't commit. If I relayed much of the ideologies I was brought up with, people would be a little bit suspicious :laugh:.

 

So while I might disagree with our Nazi friend here more often than not, I get why he is that way. Even if he's too angry & reactionary for his own good.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a good topic for a thread in the Water Cooler. When is a username unacceptable?

 

I wanted to join as 'Jesus' Older Sister' but wasn't able(!) A filter stopped me but allowed the senior members of the Nazi party to waltz in... Do you think I should go for 'Allah' or 'Pol Pot' and see what happens? (That's a rhetorical question, for anyone who is unsure.)

 

Or, maybe, just as we're debating 'confidence' around here, we could discuss the definition of 'offensive'? First dibs on the popcorn selling.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I think honor is something known only to men. Women may have their exclusive strengths, but I don't think I've met a women who knows what honor and codes are really all about; and what it means to not be swayed by shifting circumstances. It means you do what's gotta be done even if you're outnumbered by thousands.

 

I had to laugh at this...as a guy who knows better to believe this crap! Of course women know about honor. What a bunch of poo-poo! This quote also reminds of me of the fine line between a lot of ideas we fill out heads with...that there is a fine line between one extreme and another at times...so, this could describe someone who is brainwashed and simply a fool!

 

[guy here]

Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...