Masculinity

[Øjeblikket]

Women, now open to positions of power and wealth, are only marrying to increase this power and wealth.

We should stray from such simplifications. Or, if at least, acknowledge that such a grand statement can hardly achieve accuracy when derived from such a specific, or small, study group.

 

[Øjeblikket]

I'm probably going to get ripped for this,but, using War, a battle, a military campaign as an example; you are in a foxhole in Viet Nam with your "buddy" fighting for your life. I guarantee you I want a masculine male in their with me(one who would fight to the death) than someone who is "afraid" or cowardly. My experience with males who are "less masculine" or who adopt feminine traits are for lack of a better word, "pussys". They don't want to fight for what they believe in (if they believe in anything) They would rather "cut and run". Although, their is a minority of those I know, who would stand up(no pun intended).

Bloodsword, I pardon you for your obvious inexperience, but what you have posted is ridiculous.

 

[speed]

We should stray from such simplifications. Or, if at least, acknowledge that such a grand statement can hardly achieve accuracy when derived from such a specific, or small, study group.

I would assume you would have disregarded my grand statements by now. And i smack myself for not adding my obligatory "it seems as if". Still, the statement within its context works, but on its own, it does seem a bit simplistic. Pardon my overly dramatic streaks.

But yes, a small study group of midwestern, white, middle and upper middle class professionals is the basis; oh, and I did read a Newsweek article that stated more or less the same thing--also went on to state this was a reason for divorce and so many single 30+ women. Of course, Newsweek is hardly a bastion of truth or well-researched essays.

 

[MasterOLightning]

I've taken Sociology courses that addressed this in the past, and I'm currently in a course on the family. Research generally supports what Speed and myself are arguing. No one I know has specifically cited women's work as a cause of stratification though. I think it's probably too controversial.

 

[Øjeblikket]

Research generally supports what Speed and myself are arguing.

But yes, a small study group of midwestern, white, middle and upper middle class professionals is the basis;

ok, but -

this

Women, now open to positions of power and wealth, are only marrying to increase this power and wealth.

does not follow from this

I know a few nice but men that traded up if you will for attractive wives with good jobs, who now run their lives. Its very very sad and emasculating for the man. And then their controlling wives start complaining about their spouses ball-lessness; yet while they complain over dinner, they tell them what to do, or ask them why they wore that shirt, instead of the one they suggested. Its terrible really

Without degrading a woman's ability to find exactly what she is looking for.

I'm sure there are strong-willed powerful men that are of course natural counterparts to these women, and that these powerful and strong women are capable of finding such men without finding also disappointment.

 

[speed]

I'm sure there are strong-willed powerful men that are of course natural counterparts to these women, and that these powerful and strong women are capable of finding such men without finding also disappointment.

Yes, yes, jesus. Life is not always logical. In fact, it is generally a totally irrational affair. There were two seperate points brought up by Master of Lightning: 1) women at 30, give in, and marry nice men whom they contol; 2) professional women generally marry only as successful professional men. I broke said comments down into seperate paragraphs. And furthermore, they were observations. This is not a scholarly journal article--not that they're based on well-researched and objective methods these days.

 

[Øjeblikket]

I am sorry if I was rude and I swear that I really don't know what I said to cause offense - it was wholly unintentional, whatever it was.

What you lack in subtlety you make up for in ignorance. My orientation shouldn't even matter but you elected to question it because you wanted to draw attention to what you thought was my personal character.

You sounded defensive about effeminate homosexuals so naturally I thought you could be one yourself. There is no reason to be offended either, unless you don't like such men.

This should be interesting...

How could you possibly perceive either a defensive position or an offended one in the following question:

I suppose you think effeminate homosexual men are 'confused' or 'abnormal', right?

Honestly, does that really appear to be a statement made in defense of effeminate homosexual men or one which simply presents a challenge to your supposed typical role model?

 

[Justin S.]

I preferred cryptic over condescending.

 

[BloodSword]

Bloodsword, I pardon you for your obvious inexperience, but what you have posted is ridiculous.

I don't comprehend your statement. My obvious inexperience? What I posted is ridiculous? You pardon me? WTF!! To convince others in this world my friend, you MUST SUBSTANTIATE your self. Your statement certainly DOES NOT remotely appear experienced. I challenge you, clarify yourself!!

 

[BloodSword]

What some call bravery, others call stupidity.

To be "brave"--to realize and accept your fear, and move onwards anyway. Stupid people don't realize or accept their fear. So, according to you if your brave your stupid. Well, your statement is..........well.....just STUPID.

 

[MasterOLightning]

What you posted was ridiculous. You're obviously coming from a meat-headed football player's perspective that people that don't meet your criteria for being a man are "pussys." You told us a lot with that statement. I don't think bravery is a strictly masculine trait. In many cases it requires a lot of bravery to be openly gay, probably especially in your city. Some of the effeminate men you derided are certainly more brave than you.

 

[OldScratch]

Geez folks - we are (mostly) adults and should be able to discuss even contentious issues such as homosexuality(flamboyant, effeminate or what have you) without calling one another bigots or meatheads! It is unreasonable to expect everyone to be quite as universally "tolerant" about such behaviors as our PC society demands in "real-life." People have strong almost visceral reactions to topics like this and there is nothing necessarily "ignorant" about it. Our general approval or disapproval of various human behaviors often transcend what even science or studies such as those investigating allegedly gay bees, may divulge.

 

[BloodSword]

What you posted was ridiculous. You're obviously coming from a meat-headed football player's perspective that people that don't meet your criteria for being a man are "pussys." You told us a lot with that statement. I don't think bravery is a strictly masculine trait. In many cases it requires a lot of bravery to be openly gay, probably especially in your city. Some of the effeminate men you derided are certainly more brave than you.

Did you read my post completely and thouroughly? Apparently not. I was not trying to deride anyone. Merely trying to point out that along with genetics, upbringing has a profound affect on how humans turn out. Forums are a venue to express opinions and that is what I did. Name-calling is not appropriate. Believe me that your idea of me being a "meathead football player" will certainly not cause me to lose any sleep. It is people who think like you that is causingthe decay of this society. Always rushing to defend "gay" people for what you percieve as a slur against them. Always making the so-called "politically correct" statements. It almost feels at times, when I deal with people such as yourself that I have to DEFEND my sexual identity. Proclaiming a persons gay lifestyle as being brave and coming out nauseates me. Men who are "afraid and cowardly" was my crtiteria for being a "pussy", not being gay. I never said that. Come down off you fuckin' high horse and comprehend what you read before you respond. My opinions also are based on my experiences, not something I read in a book or saw in a study or saw on television. Look past all the horseshit the "media culture" wants you to see. And develop one idea of your own, Master of Nothingness. Enough time has been wasted on you. When all is said and done, when the day is over, I know in my heart a woman wants a man to be a man. Period. Quit feeling sorry for yourself because you believe women have the upper hand. The only way a woman can mess with your head is if you let her.

 

[Norsemaiden]

Ojeblikket, thanks for explaining my ignorant faux pas. I accept your rebuke for my lack of subtlty.

Old Scratch makes an excellent point about how the subject of homosexuality evokes knee jerk reactions. Those who are critical most often are so because of an instinctive reaction and those that defend it most often do so out of either personal interests or because they subscribe to the morality dictated by society. To quote BloodSword:

Always rushing to defend "gay" people for what you percieve as a slur against them. Always making the so-called "politically correct" statements

For a sensible debate on this, both of these reactions are unsuitable because they get in the way of a logical assessment.
I doubt we could possibly debate this without incurring this problem.

 

[speed]

Geez folks - we are (mostly) adults and should be able to discuss even contentious issues such as homosexuality(flamboyant, effeminate or what have you) without calling one another bigots or meatheads! It is unreasonable to expect everyone to be quite as universally "tolerant" about such behaviors as our PC society demands in "real-life." People have strong almost visceral reactions to topics like this and there is nothing necessarily "ignorant" about it. Our general approval or disapproval of various human behaviors often transcend what even science or studies such as those investigating allegedly gay bees, may divulge.

Almost a year ago, a homosexuality thread started a crisis on this board, that required the election of moderators to control. At the time, my inference on this problem was that many people on this board fear homosexuals, out of their own repressed teenage and adult-youth fears of their sexual identification, or some deep-seated unexamined cultural hatred for them. This is such a taboo topic no one is confident enough to tackle head on. We all--including me--result to stereotypes, name-calling, or Politically Correct come-backs. No one seems to want to really address the issue.

I know Foucault wrote a 3 volume series on sex, and a great deal of it, is about how cultural has shaped our perception of homosexuality. I have not read it, but it may be interesting to discuss if anyone has. Also, Gore Vidal--whose essays I love--has written rather extensively on the topic, but from a very-pro-gay perspective.

I have no problems with homosexuals, but, I do have a natural reaction of disgust when I meet a person whom I think is gay. A literal furrowing of the brow, closing of the eyes, teeth clenching frown. Thus, I have no idea what brings this on, as I have no problems talking with such persons, and lived with a homosexual who was in a monogamous relationship with a man he ended up marrying, for a whole summer--I wasnt too happy with who i was told I'd room with, but he was a perfectly normal individual who just happened to like men over women. Thus, this is some experience-related evidence, of my question of whether or not this reaction is natural, or was conditioned in me by culture and society?

 

[BloodSword]

My post was a response to "Master of Whatever" Who insulted me by calling me a "meathead". He made other comments I completely disagree with. What NorseMaiden and Speed said is very true. But, I have a problem with dancing around issues. I personally do not have a problem with gay people. What consenting adults do behind closed doors is of no concern to me. What does bother me is their "lifestyle." I do not want to be around it, and certainly do not want my children near it. And that is MY right! The society in which we live in seems to condone all behaviour, simply because it is that persons personal choice and we have no right to be discriminate. Bullshit!! Thinking like this is destroying society. I'm sick and tired of hearing about how "gay" people should be treated. What ever happened to the stability and concern for the "Man, woman" family. I assure you I have no deep-seeded fear of being "gay". My genetics, upbringing and personal choice have made me a "straight" man, who respects and adores women. Now, in today's world I must defend how I feel, but aknowledge others. Your messin' with the wrong bull. So, if this forum can't handle how I feel because I'm not doing what's "trendy" then kick me out. Period.

 

[Norsemaiden]

I'm sure that you should not be kicked out BloodSword. You are very balanced on this issue and certainly not at all "bigoted".

Does anyone know about the origin of the word bigot? That is quite interesting. It comes from the word "visigoth" and the term has occured because when the Visigoths, pagan, were presented with the Bible, by Christians, they were outraged by the insulting idea that they should obey such a doctrine. So, ever since this the word bigot has meant: one who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.

 

[Smoof]

Those who are critical most often are so because of an instinctive reaction and those that defend it most often do so out of either personal interests or because they subscribe to the morality dictated by society.

Morality dictated by society? How so? I support gays in their fights for equal rights as anyone else and why shouldn't I? I don't care if someone is homosexual, to me it means nothing besides their sexual preference and a way of acting, which isn't always what's perpetuated in the media. It's true, I find the thought, vision, picture, what-have-you of homosexual relations rather disgusting, but it's not my business as I'm sure they find my sexual activities revolting (maybe.) I think having tolerance for homosexuals does not come from some bullshit libby, P.C. trash; but rather it comes from being an enlightened individual able to realize that people ought to have some equality when it comes down to it. And just to make sure I'm not misunderstood, I'm not talking about being equal on a moral, physical or intellectual level, I'm talking being equal on an opportunity(?) level. Homosexual tendencys have nothing to do with so-called "morals."

In addition, how do you mean morality dictated by society? What I see everyday are typical Judeo-Christian morals, which tends to generally be at odds with itself. By this I mean, "accepting people for who they are," and then also calling homosexuality "immoral."

I personally find it rather irrational that someone may think homosexuals threaten traditional marriage rules of Mom/Dad. Are they so afraid that homosexuals getting married will invalidate their own marriage? Are they so insecure? What is so bothersome about the idea of two people wanting to get married anyway? Marriage is nothing anyway. It's nothing more than sharing legal benefits of having a spouse, in reality, it means nothing. It doesn't mean commitment, it does not reflect masculine or feminine(?) ideals, nothing at all.

As far as mens masculinity, that is a difficult subject to address. Certainly, there seems to be a motherly influence on everything these days. I just recently read a story about a school district banning "chase games," as they're afraid children may get hurt. This seems to me something very feminine in nature, as I always recall my mother telling me to becareful and not get hurt. However, I question if this is a real issue or not? Or perhaps it is a race related issue? It seems as though white-males are typically taught to be understanding, caring, emotional, etc, etc whatever was mentioned in this thread. But it seems to me, any current black culture attempts to teach black-males to be tough guys. I wont go into detail as I'm sure you know exactly what I'm talking about.

Apologies if my post is a little rambling and seems to lack direction, I tend to do that from time to time, especially when I'm exhausted as I am.

 

[BloodSword]

The pompous and high-horse individuals who took offense to my entitled opinions well, you never properly substaniated yourselves. Somehow, that is not surprising. The person Ojebblikket should just back off of NorseMaiden. I re-read her post or? to you and she most definitley did nothing to offend you. NorseMaiden posts only well-researched and properly thought-out replys. And like everyone here entitled to her opinions. However, she still had the class to apologize to you.( for what I am confused) So, this "meathead" will now fade away as to not make those I offende feel threatened. By the way, I'm a Fuckin' Alpha male.

 

[Horus]

I'm sure that you should not be kicked out BloodSword. You are very balanced on this issue and certainly not at all "bigoted".

Does anyone know about the origin of the word bigot? That is quite interesting. It comes from the word "visigoth" and the term has occured because when the Visigoths, pagan, were presented with the Bible, by Christians, they were outraged by the insulting idea that they should obey such a doctrine. So, ever since this the word bigot has meant: one who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.

So basically, anyone who's proud of the categorization they're filed into is a bigot, or so it seems, the way you defined it at least, it seems that way. Or is it that the definition is actually intended to mean that it's a much more extreme feeling?
(I feel like I worded this post horribly.)