Male low esteem

Zombrex

Zulu wrote:

You are incredible! When I say society, I mean (amazingly) society. Don't put words in my mouth please. Other men are member of society, so are women.

So women are putting pressure on men to bottle up their feeling and not to express them.? Ummm ... Have you ever meet a women! All they do is try and get men to open up, share, express to the point of distraction. Women love that sh*t. So saying both men and women put pressure on men to bottle up and not to express emotion is wrong in my opinion. Men put pressure on other men not to express emotion.

Zulu wrote:

No. I mean exactly what I said. What is your problem? Why do you insist on telling me what you want me to say?

You talk about society as if it is a thing in itself! Certain members of society put pressure on other members. When someone says "society put awful pressure on women to look thin" what they really mean is other women put pressure on other women to look like Kate Mose. When you say "society" puts pressure on men to bottle up emotions, who are you talking about?

Zulu wrote:

...and I never said it was. GET OVER IT.

Zulu wrote:

The best way to understand, is to try and understand why a young man might feel intimated by the feminist movement.

:rolleyes:

The last 3 paragraphs or my previous post explain why men are threated by the feminist movement.. i hope you were paying attention...

Zulu wrote:

...in your opinion as a man.

Is that a question .. or a statment .. or is your keyboard broken. Am I supposed to quess the point you are trying to make ... is this a game, do I win a prize?

Zulu wrote:

No one is disputing that - unfortunately, SOCIETY belittles/mocks/undermines man that attempt to do so.

I know, that is the problem which it is time to over come. Are you honestly saying that if all the men accepted other men who expressed emotion, we would still have to deal with the women?? We wouldn't, as I have said women love that sh*t. Getting men to deal with other men is the problem.

Zulu wrote:

...be careful, your prejudices are showing.

Excuse me? How is that a prejudice. Is that a part of that I didn't see?

Zulu wrote:

I for one see myself as more than an animal driven by instinct. While I acknowledge that I have primal/instinctual urges - I have higher taught; I can control these.

I taught you were saying that we WERE driven by our primal urges?

We are driven by our primal urges, but that isn't an excuse. Like you said we have higher thought that allows us to control them. But we must do so in a emotional healthy manner instead of blocking things up and becoming angry ang aggressive, which leads to depression and suicide.

uum

Sorry i should have read all the post here. I thought it was a serious discussion re young males lack of confidence whereas it actually is a cat fight between the above two apes

The Corinthian

Wicknight wrote:

I first asked you to show some evidence that discrimiation is a serious factor in male depression and sucide. You didn't

Do you deny that the discrimination that occurs in cases of father’s rights has been cause for both depression and suicide in men?

Do you deny that the practice of conscription, which is incidentally in almost all countries applied only to men, results in suicides every year?

I then asked you why if it is as you claim, are suicide rates much higher in male dominiated industries such as farming, and why are suicide rates not much higher for women in industries where they are discriminated against. You didn't have an answer.

TBH I didn’t hear the question (If I overlooked it, my apologies, but I’m fairly certain it was not posed to me).

I’ve repeatedly said that such discrimination is often a factor, but that is not to say that it is the only factor. There are numerous cases where discrimination would play no part in the reasons for suicide, but that does not imply that discrimination never plays a part.

I have never dismissed male discrimination. I have never claimed it doesn't exisit.

You’ve never (up to you last post) accepted it either and in absence of that the only evidence to your stance was that “white men aren't oppressed”.

In fact I have championed reporting and openess about it when others are content to get back to complaining about those damn feminists and how unfair the world is.

Who the Hell is complaining about feminists!? I’ve not mentioned feminists anywhere!

Again i have never said that I don't believe discrimination against men exisits or is important.

Well I’d agree that you’ve never said the latter.

As soon as you show me a statistic that shows suicide rates are disproportionalty high in males who work in traditionally female dominiated areas such as child care, I will gladly say that discrimination against men is a serious factor in suicide rates. You haven't done that, or even made an attempt to do that. (and since when has the military been female dominated?? Or even discrimitory against men??)

Don’t be ridiculous. You are taking a narrow interpretation of what I’ve said and attempting to force me to stick to it. I’ve given you two areas where men are discriminated against (single fathers and conscription) and where there is traditionally an above average level of suicide.

I have never said that. I am not even sure what that first sentence means. I have been skeptical of your reasons for which they may well be depressed because you have never given any reason not to.

Without the use of finger puppets, let me reiterate; it means that you complain that men don’t come forward with their problems, yet in the same breath dismiss many of these problems. This ironically, makes you part of the problem.

So how again am I against reporting or how do I deny that discrimination exists TC. Please enlighten me.

Why don’t men report discrimination? Because people like you don’t believe them.

Zombrex

uum wrote:

Sorry i should have read all the post here. I thought it was a serious discussion re young males lack of confidence whereas it actually is a cat fight between the above two apes

You do know you are on Boards.ie right

Zombrex

uum wrote:

Its almost all because of women and whether the lad is single or not. Having a girlf or at least being able to score everynow and again makes such a huge difference to a fella's outlook on life you just wouldnt believe it.

...

if everyone had a girlfriend then there'd be a whole lot less violence on the streets on a saturday night and a lot less suicides too.
The opposite sex and our natural instincts are the root of so many problems today. Drink gives respite for a time

I don't think it is quite as simple as that. While I am sure loneliness and isolation play a major role, often suicidal people are in relationships or married. Depression can also hinder people getting into relationships so saying getting a girl-friend is a cure for suicide is a bit of a non-starter. It is kinda like saying depressed people should just get happy.

I think every quote is from Wicknight. :rolleyes:

Feeling intimated by the feminist movement isn't the feminist movements responsibily or fault.

I disagree with you totally here. I have no problem with equality. Most guys don't. As long as its true equality, but thats a different thread.

I'll freely admit feminists freak me out. They're (the 6-7 I've met) scarey individuals that have a tendacy to belittle men, and generalise all men as trying to hold them down. I quite admire women who drive for equality, but feminists don't want equality. they want to be more powerful than men. And they can be quite intimating about it.

Feminism and the equality movement have allowed women to redefine their roles in society.

I'm glad you made a difference

Men need to do the same, and to be honest they are struggling. The amount of anger and respentment I have seen towards modern women is scary. The thing is no one asked the men if they wanted to change their roles. They were pretty happy the way things were till the women just upped and did it and now men are sitting around going "what the f**k just happened".

Huge generalisation, but alot of guys are struggling with redefining their roles in society. But the thing you continue to ignore is that alot of that is caused by women themselves.

Women have changed. They're more confident, no longer happy with traditional roles, and have recognised the potential within themselves. Which is great. but the problem remains, that while women continue to strive for equality, they expect to receive all the previous perks of being a woman. They want to be professional business women, but at the same time they want guys to believe them to be soft, gentle, caring etc. They use the traditional roles alongside the "newer" roles to get what they want.

And this is confusing. Its annoying. And it makes alot of guys mad. Hell, it pissed me off for roughly two years. I got used to it. Actually I gave up caring that much anymore. But alot of guys won't stop caring and that remains partially womens fault as a sex in modern times.

Lads mags put naked bimbos on the front cover and offer 101 tips to pull birds, completely ignoring the fact that for women sex is about emotional depth not technique and they are far more likely to pull you than you pull them.

When was the last time you were in a nightclub? Actually tell me where it is in Ireland that women as a whole will approach guys themselves..... because in all the clubs i've been in I can count the number of times (on one hand) a woman has approached me or any of my friends in a club.. Tradition, that women like. guys approach, women choose. You're fooling yourself, if you think that has changed in any major way.

And depending on the actual mag you're reading you'll likely find just about any standpoint out there. Which is on par, with the opinions in cosmo and similiar mags, that women have themselves.

When these men who buy into all this, because it is reassurring and comforts them that they are really in control over the situation, go into the real world and find none of it actually works, they become confused and angry, and direct this not towards the aspect of male society that convinced them it would work (ie. advertisers, television and their friends) but towards women, who are no playing unfairly.

Actually many of the misconceptions that guys have towards women are generated by women themselves. Treat women like a gentleman, be a friend, be reliable, etc etc. Generated by women, with the aim of continuing to receive the same perks they've been getting for years.

Do you REALLY think women want to be treated the same way we treat other guys? Equality is one thing, Full equality for both sexes is another.

The whole notion of a "prick tease" comes from this confusion and resentment.

Actually no it doesn't. Prick-tease actually comes from women on sexual powertrips. Prick-teasers are also women who go out to clubs, with the actual aim of getting drinks bought, just from flirting. This is quite prevelant among young women of 16-19 that go to clubs. (I know a few that will fully admit it, and don't see anything wrong with it) Wicknight, I don't know if you're male or female, but you have some really odd notions....

The problem is this makes it very hard for men to show emotion to other men because men associate emotion with weakness. And even amoung your friends you don't want to show weakness in case they are un-impressed/disgussed/themselves threatened by it.

Yup, its true. At this time in my life, less so, but its still part of my life. You show weakness and you're moved further down the food chain. But you're fooling yourself completely if you believe that women bear no part in this. Women are just as quick to tear down guys, as guys are themselves.

Just because there is discrimination in some industry areas doesn't mean white males as a group are oppressed. If that were true women would still be far more oppressed, a statement that really seems to piss you off. You can't have it both ways

Funny. And yet women are being oppressed? You can't have it both ways. Its true though. On both aspects, male and females can be oppressed/discriminated against, but as a sex neither are.

Wicknight, I have no hatred towards women. I have very little bitterness left in me either. I actually get along well with them. But what i've said is true from what I have seen in my life. Different perceptions perhaps, but I have seen women intentionally put men down, just for the sake of it, and vice versa. Women do have a huge effect (thankfully ) on guys, both physically and socially, and they have the ability in them to help or hinder guys developments.

However, in many cases they while growing up alongside guys, will cause hurt, or influence a guy in a negative fashion, intentionally or unintentionally. It happens with both sexes, and as such Women are a factor in Male Suicides, and Male low-esteem.

Zulu

Wicknight wrote:

So women are putting pressure on men to bottle up their feeling and not to express them.? Ummm ... Have you ever meet a women! All they do is try and get men to open up, share, express to the point of distraction. Women love that sh*t. So saying both men and women put pressure on men to bottle up and not to express emotion is wrong in my opinion. Men put pressure on other men not to express emotion.

Yes, some women do, just as some men don't pressure others to bottle up emotions. I like your cloaked insults but they don't strenghten your arguments. Go around, bawling crying everytime some one upsets you; wear your emotions on your sleve and see how many women "who love that sh1t" you score/impress. If you do, you will quickly become isolated.

Wicknight wrote:

You talk about society as if it is a thing in itself! Certain members of society put pressure on other members. When someone says "society put awful pressure on women to look thin" what they really mean is other women put pressure on other women to look like Kate Mose. When you say "society" puts pressure on men to bottle up emotions, who are you talking about?

Nope - men also put pressure on women to be thin. You sir are talking through your hat.

Wicknight wrote:

The last 3 paragraphs or my previous post explain why men are threated by the feminist movement.. i hope you were paying attention...

I was. I don't agree. Understand?

Wicknight wrote:

Is that a question .. or a statment .. or is your keyboard broken. Am I supposed to quess the point you are trying to make ... is this a game, do I win a prize?

Here's a clue: questions end in question marks. Work it out.

Wicknight wrote:

I know, that is the problem which it is time to over come. Are you honestly saying that if all the men accepted other men who expressed emotion, we would still have to deal with the women??

No. We need society to change.

Wicknight wrote:

We wouldn't, as I have said women love that sh*t.

and as I have said - you're talking through your hat. Expressing emotion infrequently in the initimacy of a relationship can let your partner feel important/trusted/etc.. discussing your problems openly is something different.

Wicknight wrote:

Excuse me? How is that a prejudice.

Your assumption of women (as a whole) are quite prejudiced.

uum wrote:

I thought it was a serious discussion re young males lack of confidence whereas it actually is a cat fight between the above two apes

What with your ledgendary come backs, and incitive points, I can only stand down. Please lead us... :rolleyes:

So women are putting pressure on men to bottle up their feeling and not to express them.? Ummm ... Have you ever meet a women! All they do is try and get men to open up, share, express to the point of distraction. Women love that sh*t. So saying both men and women put pressure on men to bottle up and not to express emotion is wrong in my opinion. Men put pressure on other men not to express emotion.

Yes and no. Women love to hear other peoples problems, but they don't want to hear problems that are concerned with them. And since women freely talk to each other, telling secrets to a woman about another woman is like shooting yourself in the belly. A slow and agonising death.

Have you ever seen the film "Bewitched" with Liz Hurley. Nice little scene where the lead guy becomes "the most sensitive guy in the world". Get it out, it might enlighten you to how things are. I know its a Hollywood movie, but it does point out some home truths.

The other aspect is that not all emotion is gentle. So where do you run that through? With women? God no, you'd get slammed with a freak card. Other guys? Nah, thats a fight. So you keep the frustrations inside, whereas women will become "emotional" which is ok, since they're women. Lovely.

We are driven by our primal urges, but that isn't an excuse. Like you said we have higher thought that allows us to control them. But we must do so in a emotional healthy manner instead of blocking things up and becoming angry ang aggressive, which leads to depression and suicide.

Higher Thought? I'd definetly like an explanation of this.

Sleepy

Lads, when discussing feminism can we please get the term right. I've no problem with feminists, in fact, I'd include myself as one according to it's traditional definiton i.e. one who believes that men and women are equal and that an individual shouldn't be discriminated against based on sex.

What most people seem to refer to as feminists these days are simply not feminists, they're anti-men groups or pro-female superiority groups (whichever way you prefer to look at it). This has been coined quite aptly as feminazism.

Wicknight, are you male? Because I'm guessing not. Can you honestly name one area in which females are discriminated against in western society? I can't. I can think of areas which tend not to have many women working in them, yet for every one of these I could name you another industry that tends to have very few men working in them (Army - Beautician, Engineering - PR, Mechanic - Nursing, Plumbing - Childcare, etc. etc. etc.)

I think the initial point made was entirely valid. Generation X have been raised by fathers that had the traditional role of breadwinner and provider. A male child's greatest role-model is his father while he is developing. Likewise, many women grew up watching their mother's campaigning for equal rights and have grown to want to fight that same battle (despite it having already been won).

With the emergence of a quasi-equality between the sexes, the role for men in society has changed. We are never going to have the same role as our father's had and figuring out our new role in society was always going to be problematic, the shifts in society in the last 30/40 years have changed over 2000 years of social conditioning. It will probably take another couple of generations before a backlash against the feminazi brigade takes place and a genuinely equal society is created.

In tandem with the shifts between the male and female roles within society, other major societal shifts are taking place. The move from the "job for life" working world to the "move every two years" workforce of today has left people more isolated as they move around to further their career, losing touch with old friends along the way. The celtic tiger created a belief in many of us that we could be financially secure before our thirties. Sure, my parents had bought a house by 24, but it wasn't fully furnished for another 3/4 years. Nowadays when someone buys a house it's done up to the last from the word go. People are less prepared to settle for second best than their parents were and are then deflated when they find they can't achieve what they want straight away.

We have so many things better than our parents had them. Yet our expectations are so much higher than theirs ever were. For most of our father's success was holding down a decent job, marrying a nice woman, having kids with her and some good friends in the local golf club. For our generation, success is a not needing to work by the time your 30, marrying a supermodel and owning the local golf club. (Slight exageration but you get the point).

Zombrex

The Corinthian wrote:

Do you deny that the discrimination that occurs in cases of father’s rights has been cause for both depression and suicide in men?

Do you deny that the practice of conscription, which is incidentally in almost all countries applied only to men, results in suicides every year?

TBH I didn’t hear the question (If I overlooked it, my apologies, but I’m fairly certain it was not posed to me).

The Corinthian wrote:

I’ve repeatedly said that such discrimination is often a factor, but that is not to say that it is the only factor. There are numerous cases where discrimination would play no part in the reasons for suicide, but that does not imply that discrimination never plays a part.

But you have still never given any evidence that it does play a part. At all.

You’ve never (up to you last post) accepted it either and in absence of that the only evidence to your stance was that “white men aren't oppressed”.

The Corinthian wrote:

Who the Hell is complaining about feminists!? I’ve not mentioned feminists anywhere!

Never said you did. Who the hell is complaining male discrimination doesn't exist!!!

The Corinthian wrote:

Don’t be ridiculous. You are taking a narrow interpretation of what I’ve said and attempting to force me to stick to it. I’ve given you two areas where men are discriminated against (single fathers and conscription) and where there is traditionally an above average level of suicide.

Don't be ridiculous! I ask you to back up your statement that discrimination against men is a serious factor in suicides (we were initally talking about workplace discrimination but obviously you don't want to talk about that anymore) and instead of doing so you attempt to narrow the discussion down to the army and single fathers.

What is the percentage of over all suicides that these groups repressent?? How many out of the total number of sucides in Ireland were single fathers. How many out of the total number of army suicides were conscripted soldiers? Do we even have conscription in Ireland????

The Corinthian wrote:

Without the use of finger puppets, let me reiterate; it means that you complain that men don’t come forward with their problems, yet in the same breath dismiss many of these problems. This ironically, makes you part of the problem.

And again I say I am not dismissive of the real reasons that men are depressed and suicidal, only your ones that you seem to have no evidence for or even the will to properly back up.

The Corinthian wrote:

Why don’t men report discrimination? Because people like you don’t believe them.

How childish ...

Have you ever reported an act of discrimination? Do you have any idea of the number of reports a year, the number that are turned away, the number that are ignored? Do you have any idea of the process of investigation, the people and departments that are involved, or the laws on which they are based?

Or are you just talking crap.

You seem to have no clue about discrimination, the processes behind it, or the solutions to it. You just seem to want to shout and scream that things aren't right and someone is to blame!! The "blame game" is pointless unless you make a serious attempt to look at the real causes and solutions to the problems.

We have so many things better than our parents had them. Yet our expectations are so much higher than theirs ever were. For most of our father's success was holding down a decent job, marrying a nice woman, having kids with her and some good friends in the local golf club. For our generation, success is a not needing to work by the time your 30, marrying a supermodel and owning the local golf club. (Slight exageration but you get the point).

I saw an interesting comment on Nip Tuck on Monday night. they were talking about a Rapist and wondering how a normal gentle guy could fly off the handle and do a thing like that.

But one of them mentioned, "Transference" which means that parents expections are being transfered to their children. If they themselves felt that they hadn't reached their own potential, they transfered unconsciously those feelings to their children, expecting them to get the best grades, best colleges, best girlfriends, get rich etc etc. Which in turn generated more pressure for the sons/daughters, and which was transfered again when they themselves had children... and on.

It was an interesting reference, that I hadn't heard before. Would be another decent factor as to why Suicide is growing among teenagers...

Zombrex

Deleted User wrote:

I'll freely admit feminists freak me out. They're (the 6-7 I've met) scarey individuals that have a tendacy to belittle men, and generalise all men as trying to hold them down. I quite admire women who drive for equality, but feminists don't want equality. they want to be more powerful than men. And they can be quite intimating about it.

Oh god .. this old chestnut again .. [bangs head of wall]

What exactly has been your experience with the feminist movement. Please name, in any order you like, the feminist groups/organistions/writers/individual who call for women to have more power than men, that in your life have "freaked you out"

Who were these extreme feminist you met? Were they influencatal writers, leaders of feminist organisations or heads of any feminist politcal lobby? Did they publish feminist news letters, write feminist books or teach feminist courses.

Or were they just a couple of total loony women.

But like you said .. different thread ...

Deleted User wrote:

Huge generalisation, but alot of guys are struggling with redefining their roles in society. But the thing you continue to ignore is that alot of that is caused by women themselves.

I said it was caused by women in my post. It was cause by womens liberation, and the feminist movement. That I think was the first sentence.

Deleted User wrote:

Women have changed. They're more confident, no longer happy with traditional roles, and have recognised the potential within themselves. Which is great. but the problem remains, that while women continue to strive for equality, they expect to receive all the previous perks of being a woman. They want to be professional business women, but at the same time they want guys to believe them to be soft, gentle, caring etc. They use the traditional roles alongside the "newer" roles to get what they want.


And this is confusing. Its annoying. And it makes alot of guys mad. Hell, it pissed me off for roughly two years. I got used to it. Actually I gave up caring that much anymore. But alot of guys won't stop caring and that remains partially womens fault as a sex in modern times.

It is confusing. For a lot of men it is annoying. But what do you suggest, that we force women to act in ways that we find more managable? Women have the right to be what ever they want to be, men have to learn to deal with this, they have to find their own role in society. Blaming women for changing and then getting mad because we now don't know how to fit into this new world is pointless. And that is a change that must come about by men, through men and for men.

Deleted User wrote:

When was the last time you were in a nightclub? Actually tell me where it is in Ireland that women as a whole will approach guys themselves..... because in all the clubs i've been in I can count the number of times (on one hand) a woman has approached me or any of my friends in a club.. Tradition, that women like. guys approach, women choose. You're fooling yourself, if you think that has changed in any major way.

Women choose... you hit the nail on the head right there mate. Women choose their partner for the night. The men don't. The men have very little power in the situtation, and all the 101 tips and guides make very little difference to this. Men like to think that they will get the bird they want in a night club, but the simple fact the power and choice is competely with the woman.

Deleted User wrote:

And depending on the actual mag you're reading you'll likely find just about any standpoint out there. Which is on par, with the opinions in cosmo and similiar mags, that women have themselves.

Actuall I always found lads mags to be pretty much identical, bar the name on the front.

Deleted User wrote:

Actually many of the misconceptions that guys have towards women are generated by women themselves. Treat women like a gentleman, be a friend, be reliable, etc etc. Generated by women, with the aim of continuing to receive the same perks they've been getting for years.

It is a "perk" to have a boyfriend who treats you nice?

Deleted User wrote:

Do you REALLY think women want to be treated the same way we treat other guys? Equality is one thing, Full equality for both sexes is another.

Well in my experience women want to be treated with loving respect. I think you are still listening to the 101 Ways to Pull Birds.

Part of my issue with all this sex in advertisments is the notion that there is a way to treat women to make them be attracted to you, and it goes back to the idea of control. Men want to know the seceret so they feel they have control over the situations. Of course it is all bullsh*t, there is no "way" to treat women that makes them fall at their knees, all women are different, just like all men are different. Men get confused when they begin to hear conflicting advice, just like you seem to be saying. Oh women tell us they want to be treated like ladies, but then they want the "bad-guy", then they swap again and want us to treat them like equals, then they want the door opened. For a start who are these "women"! I have never meet a woman that had exactly the same views as another. Men need to stop worrying about what "women" want and start thinking about what the woman sitting in front of them wants. Or even forgetting that stop worry about what women want all together. If you don't want to hold the door open for a women, then don't. If she complains, who cares.

Deleted User wrote:

Actually no it doesn't. Prick-tease actually comes from women on sexual powertrips. Prick-teasers are also women who go out to clubs, with the actual aim of getting drinks bought, just from flirting. This is quite prevelant among young women of 16-19 that go to clubs. (I know a few that will fully admit it, and don't see anything wrong with it) Wicknight, I don't know if you're male or female, but you have some really odd notions....

Oh sigh ... if the woman said to the man, "we will have sex tonight", the man buys her drinks and then she pisses off, then yes what you are saying is correct.

But that doesn't happen. The woman doesn't say anything about sex. The man buys her drinks because he believes if he does then he will get sex. That is an assumption on the part of the man. When he doesn't, he gets pissed off because he believes he didn't get what he paid for. He directs this anger towards the woman, who actually hasn't done anything and calls her a pricktease.

Deleted User wrote:

Yup, its true. At this time in my life, less so, but its still part of my life. You show weakness and you're moved further down the food chain. But you're fooling yourself completely if you believe that women bear no part in this. Women are just as quick to tear down guys, as guys are themselves.

I have never come across a situtation where I could not talk to a female friend about a person problem, yet I couldn't tell my best mate that I was lonely. These is nothing against my best mate, he is a good person. But as they say its a guy thing

I think you are confusing problems talking to men and women and problems talking to horrible people.

Deleted User wrote:

Funny. And yet women are being oppressed? You can't have it both ways. Its true though. On both aspects, male and females can be oppressed/discriminated against, but as a sex neither are.

I didn't say women were being oppressed. I said white males weren't

Deleted User wrote:

I have seen women intentionally put men down, just for the sake of it, and vice versa.

But these are nasty people. These aren't the people you turn to for help and support anyway. The issue in this thread is that men cannot turn to the other men in their lives for support, not because they are nasty people, but because men have a barrier up that stops them from expression emotions.

Nasty women aren't going to be any nice to men than nasty men are going to be nice to other men. Nice women, friends of yours are going to be more supportive to you than your nice male friends, and that is the issue here.

The Corinthian

Wicknight wrote:

But you have still never given any evidence that it does play a part. At all.

Are you in a perpetual state of denial?

Again:

Do you deny that the discrimination that occurs in cases of father’s rights has been cause for both depression and suicide in men?

http://www.fathers4kids.org/html/6_Articles.htm?ID=45
http://comment.independent.co.uk/letters/story.jsp?story=602564

Do you deny that the practice of conscription, which is incidentally in almost all countries applied only to men, results in suicides every year?

http://www.gendercide.org/case_conscription.html
http://www.med.uio.no/ipsy/ssff/Bled.htm#M.%20Fredriksen

You’ve never (up to you last post) accepted it either and in absence of that the only evidence to your stance was that “white men aren't oppressed”.

I’ve implied it throughout as you have implied the opposite. Were that not the case, what would we be in disagreement over?

Don't be ridiculous! I ask you to back up your statement that discrimination against men is a serious factor in suicides (we were initally talking about workplace discrimination but obviously you don't want to talk about that anymore) and instead of doing so you attempt to narrow the discussion down to the army and single fathers.

With regard to the workplace, I was simply pointing out that there is indeed discrimination present in response to one of your typically sweeping statements. When asked about discrimination’s relationship to suicide, I gave it (in the two examples above that you continue to avoid).

What is the percentage of over all suicides that these groups repressent?? How many out of the total number of sucides in Ireland were single fathers. How many out of the total number of army suicides were conscripted soldiers? Do we even have conscription in Ireland????

I have repeatedly stated that this is only a factor. There are numerous other factors also at play. I have also only given two very obvious examples, chosen on the basis that I would have hoped that even you would not nitpick them. No doubt were I to suggest that the grass is green, you’d ask for evidence on that.

Nonetheless, even if such pressures are not the norm, they are still pressures that men face that drive them to depression and suicide that are not experienced by women - which incidentally is what we’re discussing.

How childish ...

Have you ever reported an act of discrimination? Do you have any idea of the number of reports a year, the number that are turned away, the number that are ignored? Do you have any idea of the process of investigation, the people and departments that are involved, or the laws on which they are based?

Or are you just talking crap.

Actually I have, and not even on my own behalf. In a firm I worked in a few years ago, a young lad was repeatedly being asked to do any and all manual labour by his female colleagues even though it was no more in his brief to do so than it was for them. It got so ridiculous that I decided to make a complaint myself. When I highlighted this to HR, they practically laughed, based upon the fact that “sure, he’s a strong lad, it’s good for him”. Only when I escalated the matter was it (quietly) dealt with.

So if you can pull that smug self-righteous head of yours out of your ass for a moment, you might actually realize that on numerous levels this happens every day - to both men and women. The difference however, is that when it happens to men it tends to be quietly brushed aside by those ‘enlightened’ intellectuals such as yourself.

Zulu

Bravo TC, Bravo.

The Corinthian

Wicknight wrote:

Please name, in any order you like, the feminist groups/organistions/writers/individual who call for women to have more power than men, that in your life have "freaked you out"

Here's one for starters:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCUM_manifesto

Zombrex

The Corinthian wrote:

Please read what I asked. Do you think the obscure SCUM manifesto, published in the 60s and largely ignored now by all but the most radiical feminist, effected Klaz's view point of feminists :rolleyes:

Quoting radical feminist is rather a silly responce TBH. They don't represent modern mainstream feminism, the form of feminism that most people experience day to day. I am pretty such you had to go searching in Google for that.

Do you want me to start quoting the father's rights group that are calling for women to be stoned to death if they cheat on their husbands because it is in the bible :rolleyes:

The Corinthian

Wicknight wrote:

Do you want me to start quoting the father's rights group that are calling for women to be stoned to death if they cheat on their husbands because it is in the bible :rolleyes:

Quote away, I've no doubt there's a good few mysoganistic looney groups out there. Hardly bothers me though, but then again I don't see things quite in the same terms of black and white as you do.

As for the SCUM manifesto being obscure, I'm sure Andy Warhol would disagree.

Zombrex

The Corinthian wrote:

Are you in a perpetual state of denial?

Do you deny that the discrimination that occurs in cases of father’s rights has been cause for both depression and suicide in men?

I’ve implied it throughout as you have implied the opposite. Were that not the case, what would we be in disagreement over?

TC i have asked you for any evidence that discrimination is a serious factor in Irish suicides and, after what must have been a frantic google search, you have given me a letter to the Independent (the UK independent) an article (a US article) that has no links to any scientific studies, and an article on conscription, a law we don't even have in Ireland

As I said before, please put forward the actual information that would show me discrimination has a serious effect on depression and sucide. Either do that or shut up about it. BTW if you already had that information, the information I assumed had shaped your view point, you would have already pressented it. I can only now assume that your view point was just an assumption, and you are now frantically trying to find something to prove it is true.

The Corinthian wrote:

I have repeatedly stated that this is only a factor. There are numerous other factors also at play. I have also only given two very obvious examples, chosen on the basis that I would have hoped that even you would not nitpick them. No doubt were I to suggest that the grass is green, you’d ask for evidence on that.

You have no evidence they are a factor. You also picked conscription as an example, a law that we don't have in Ireland FFS.

How exactly do you expect people to have a serious discussion about male depression in Ireland when you bring up conscription. The article you link to uses example from Paraguay in the 19th century!! I have no doubt that conscription is damaging to a population, and that historically it effected only men. Do you want to tell my what the f**k this has to do with raising Irish suicide rates?

The Corinthian wrote:

Nonetheless, even if such pressures are not the norm, they are still pressures that men face that drive them to depression and suicide that are not experienced by women - which incidentally is what we’re discussing.

Not in Ireland.

The Corinthian wrote:

So if you can pull that smug self-righteous head of yours out of your ass for a moment, you might actually realize that on numerous levels this happens every day - to both men and women. The difference however, is that when it happens to men it tends to be quietly brushed aside by those ‘enlightened’ intellectuals such as yourself.

Was it brushed under the table or was it dealt with? BTW you didn't make a formal discrimination complaint, you went to HR informally and they did nothing. Big fecking surprise! I asked you if you made a formal complaint in a serious manner and was it ignored. When you did that, it wasn't ignored. So why exactly do you think the system doesn't work for male discrimination? What more do you think women get? A lollipop for every report filed :rolleyes:

Zombrex

The Corinthian wrote:

Quote away, I've no doubt there's a good few mysoganistic looney groups out there. Hardly bothers me though, but then again I don't see things quite in the same terms of black and white as you do.

So you agree that the majority of feminist groups are not extreme and do not want more rights than men, and that they shouldn't be tarnished by the view point of radical feminists any more than father's right campaigners should be tarnished by the views of extreme father's groups. Because you don't see things in all-feminists-bad black and white.

Finally, we are in agreement.

Zombrex

The Corinthian wrote:

The difference however, is that when it happens to men it tends to be quietly brushed aside by those ‘enlightened’ intellectuals such as yourself.

Intellectuals such as myself who have given advice to men on this website, numerous times I might add, about their rights, and how to file discrimination claims.

Yeah, I am really holding back the system :rolleyes:

Zombrex

Zulu wrote:

Go around, bawling crying everytime some one upsets you; wear your emotions on your sleve and see how many women "who love that sh1t" you score/impress.

Who said anything about bawling like a little baby. Do you seriously believe that the alternative to men bottling up serious emotions is that they run around crying like babies while trying to score women. Who said anything about scoring impressing women for that matter??

I am talking about men being able to openly share depression and emotion with friends who are women, the same way women share emotions with other female friends. Are you saying that that is not possible? That men, as a rule cannot share emotions with close female friends because females get as uncomfortable discussing emotion with male friends as other men do?

If you are saying that it is fine, but I strongly disagree.

Zulu wrote:

Nope - men also put pressure on women to be thin. You sir are talking through your hat.

They actually don't, not directly The majority of women feel pressure to be thin because of womens media and other women. Yes they feel this pressure because they want to be "attractive," but the pressure does not come directly from men.

Zulu wrote:

Here's a clue: questions end in question marks. Work it out.

Ok, so what exactly was your point then?

Zulu wrote:

No. We need society to change.

So forgetting men for a minute, we need to educate women to be more open with feelings and more willing to talk about emotions, which they currently don't do. Right?

What i am saying is targetting "society" as a whole is pointless, because the message will be lost. Women are fine with expressing emotion with their friends they do it all the time. Men are not. Depression is higher in male dominated industries for a reason, men constinatly surrounded by other men bottle up and internalise emotions. That is the root of the problem that must be addressed. Male issues with other males.

Zulu wrote:

and as I have said - you're talking through your hat. Expressing emotion infrequently in the initimacy of a relationship can let your partner feel important/trusted/etc.. discussing your problems openly is something different.

For a start I am not talking about your girlfriend, I am talking about females in general. If the only girl you know is your girlfriend, and you feel you can't talk to her about depression it is even more a reason why the education should be tragetted at males because these are your friends, who you should be able to turn to without fear.

Zulu wrote:

Your assumption of women (as a whole) are quite prejudiced.

Do you even know what prejudiced means?

The Corinthian

Wicknight wrote:

TC i have asked you for any evidence that discrimination is a serious factor in Irish suicides and, after what must have been a frantic google search, you have given me a letter to the Independent (the UK independent) an article (a US article) that has no links to any scientific studies, and an article on conscription, a law we don't even have in Ireland

I’ve given you a number of sources of evidence that support the principle I was proposing. They highlight specific instances as well as trends that concur with what I’ve said. That some of them are not relevant to Ireland does not change the fact that they happen and have the effect I have suggested.

So feel free to respond to these points, if you do not like the evidence counter it with your own, otherwise your viewpoint is no less an assumption than you accuse mine of being - except of course I’ve actually delivered evidence (which while you’ve dismissed, you’ve not debunked).

But most of all stop using this excuse as a means to squirm out of answering the following (for the third or fourth time):

Do you deny that the discrimination that occurs in cases of father’s rights has been cause for both depression and suicide in men?

Do you deny that the practice of conscription, which is incidentally in almost all countries applied only to men, results in suicides every year?

You have no evidence they are a factor. You also picked conscription as an example, a law that we don't have in Ireland FFS.

So what if it’s not present in Ireland? Seriously, you seem intent on denying even the possibility that such a relationship between male discrimination and depression-suicide exist so much that if it happens down the road in Europe you don’t want to know?

Not in Ireland.

So by that logic, discrimination against women under Islamic law takes place openly, however as it does not take place openly in Ireland then it is irrelevant.

Was it brushed under the table or was it dealt with? BTW you didn't make a formal discrimination complaint, you went to HR informally and they did nothing. Big fecking surprise! I asked you if you made a formal complaint in a serious manner and was it ignored. When you did that, it wasn't ignored. So why exactly do you think the system doesn't work for male discrimination?

Both approaches were informal. Secondly, management tends to take the issue of discrimination against women in the workplace very seriously. However, suggest male discrimination to the same management and more often than not you’re greeted with blank stares. A bit like yours.

So you agree that the majority of feminist groups are not extreme and do not want more rights than men, and that they shouldn't be tarnished by the view point of radical feminists any more than father's right campaigners should be tarnished by the views of extreme father's groups. Because you don't see things in all-feminists-bad black and white.

I would agree that the majority of feminist groups are not extreme and do not want more rights than men, however I’m also conscious of the fact that feminist groups fundamentally there to represent the rights of women and not the principle of equality, so that if they did get more rights than men they’d hardly complain. Which oddly is why in cases where there is a very visible discrimination against men such as those highlighted by most father’s groups (of which I’m sure you’ll agree shouldn't be tarnished by the view point of ‘extreme’ father's groups), they will generally either stay quiet or in some cases even oppose any move towards equality.

Feminism is like trade unionism; it can be as tyrannical as it can be a force for good.

The Corinthian

Wicknight wrote:

Intellectuals such as myself who have given advice to men on this website, numerous times I might add, about their rights, and how to file discrimination claims.

"People who refer to themselves as intellectuals are automatically committing a social crime and, also, usually an error." - Tracy Young, Vanity Fair

Zombrex

The Corinthian wrote:

That some of them are not relevant to Ireland does not change the fact that they happen and have the effect I have suggested.

I have never denied that the events happen. I have never denied that fathers get discriminated against in custody proceedings, or that constription is damaging to young men. But none of this is relievent to a discussion about the causes and solutions to Irish male depression. You have not shown any serious link between loss of custody and suicides in Irish males, and your example of conscription is completely irrelivent as we don't have conscription in Ireland.

You are going seriously off topic to argue a denial I never made.

The Corinthian wrote:

Do you deny that the discrimination that occurs in cases of father’s rights has been cause for both depression and suicide in men?

I have no idea, and apparently neither do you. You have shown no link that it causes higher levels of suicide in Irish males as apposed to anything else.

The Corinthian wrote:

Do you deny that the practice of conscription, which is incidentally in almost all countries applied only to men, results in suicides every year?

Well for a start it doesn't any more always apply to men. Isreal has men and women conscription. I have no doubt that is is damaging to the people who are effected by it. But why are we discussing it? I deny whole heartly that conscription has anything to do with depression or suicide in Ireland, male or female.

If you cannot show a link between your claims and depression and suicide in Ireland that is not my fault TC. Demanding I deny or not deny your increasingly off topic claims is just silly. You are just arguing for arugment sake in an effort to deflect from the fact that you have no serious link between male discrimination and depression and suicide in Ireland.

The Corinthian wrote:

So what if it’s not present in Ireland? Seriously, you seem intent on denying even the possibility that such a relationship between male discrimination and depression-suicide exist so much that if it happens down the road in Europe you don’t want to know?

Down the road??

I have said that I do not believe male discriminitaton has any major role to play in Irish depression. You said it does but failed to back that up with any evidence and now you are it doesn't but it might in the future..?? WTF

Do you or do you not have evidence to back up that discrimination is actually effecting depression and suicide in Ireland?? Now??

The Corinthian wrote:

So by that logic, discrimination against women under Islamic law takes place openly, however as it does not take place openly in Ireland then it is irrelevant.

It is irrelivent to a discussion on male depression and suicide in Ireland, yes yes it is. Do you think discrimination against women in Islamic countries effects male Irish suicide rates now as well?

The Corinthian wrote:

Both approaches were informal. Secondly, management tends to take the issue of discrimination against women in the workplace very seriously. However, suggest male discrimination to the same management and more often than not you’re greeted with blank stares. A bit like yours.

The entire point of the anti-discrimation laws is that you should not have to rely on the company to make the change, because obviously the company won't automatically protect the interests of its workers. But you seem to work in a company that luckly did act, with a little prodding, to correct the discrimination, without you having to file a formal complaint. Consider yourself luck, many wouldn't have been as lucky. I still don't see how this backs up your point that male discrimination is ignored by law/society/government. You didn't even need to file a formal complaint before you got the problem fixed. Seems like it worked a lot better than most.

Zombrex

The Corinthian wrote:

"People who refer to themselves as intellectuals are automatically committing a social crime and, also, usually an error." - Tracy Young, Vanity Fair

Oh the complete and utter irony of it all.

TC, you referred to me as an Intellectual

The difference however, is that when it happens to men it tends to be quietly brushed aside by those ‘enlightened’ intellectuals such as yourself.

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

elivsvonchiaing

Wicknight wrote:

Intellectuals such as myself...

Ngggh! EWnghh! Awreahhh! nnnnnggh! Earrgh! * sits under banyan tree * - man don't tempt me like that again!

[EDIT] now in complete denial. Have you no idea how pompous a sentence like that sounds!!! E.g. "Met Stephen Hawking in the Spar - and he agreed that my theories about the big-bang and harmonics within the 4 K radiation were more consistant with the paper I scribbled down on a beer-mat last Saturday - he agrees he's my intellectual inferior:o [/EDIT]
You have to be east-coast US - (or Seattle :rolleyes: )
[EDIT] You must've been born there at least - or if not - perhaps you could have a very successful radio career over there - can't see how you could go wrong with Seattle tbh :rolleyes: [/EDIT]

Zombrex

elivsvonchiaing wrote:

Ngggh! EWnghh! Awreahhh! nnnnnggh! Earrgh! * sits under banyan tree * - man don't tempt me like that again!

does no one get double sarcasm anymore (or what ever the proper english class word for that is again)

TC was obviously being saracastic when he called me an intellectual (i would assume). And i was being doublely sarcastic when I responded with the same sarcastic definition he used. Then he forgot he had actually said it in the first place and attacked me for using his original sarcastic description. And now you are, after not bothering to actually read any of the posts, doing the same thing. Actually I am not sure what the hell you are talking about.

It reminds me of the Simpson episode where Lisa becomes a vegatarian and the girls taunt her by saying in a sarcastic tone "Are you going to marry a carrot Lisa??" and Lisa in a completely dry sarcastic tone back to highlight how ridiculous the statement is, says "Yes I am going marry a carrot". The girls then run away screaming "she admitted it, she is going to marry a carrot!!".

Sweet jesus, is all I can say. You are 9 year old girls. I am going to bed. :rolleyes:

elivsvonchiaing

Wicknight wrote:

does no one get double sarcasm anymore (or what ever the proper english class word for that is again)

TC was obviously being saracastic when he called me an intellectual (i would assume). And i was being doublely sarcastic when I responded with the same sarcastic definition he used. Then he forgot he had actually said it in the first place and attacked me for using his original sarcastic description. And now you are, after not bothering to actually read any of the posts, doing the same thing. Actually I am not sure what the hell you are talking about.

It reminds me of the Simpson episode where Lisa becomes a vegatarian and the girls taunt her by saying in a sarcastic tone "Are you going to marry a carrot Lisa??" and Lisa in a completely dry sarcastic tone back to highlight how ridiculous the statement is, says "Yes I am going marry a carrot". The girls then run away screaming "she admitted it, she is going to marry a carrot!!".

Sweet jesus, is all I can say. You are 9 year old girls. I am going to bed. :rolleyes:

Aw jebus it was at the top of the page... and i just saw red!

Wicknight wrote:

So women are putting pressure on men to bottle up their feeling and not to express them.? Ummm ... Have you ever meet a women! All they do is try and get men to open up, share, express to the point of distraction. Women love that sh*t. So saying both men and women put pressure on men to bottle up and not to express emotion is wrong in my opinion. Men put pressure on other men not to express emotion.

Don't agree entirely with this - think women wan't to over explore the male psyche - a switch goes on - in the male head - she's not my mother - i'm not 7 years old - remote - all ireland final - man u - even ice -hockey/cricket will do at this point.

E.g. the male mind - we think of sex so often - and when women ask us what we were thinking of - she thinks <he looks agitated> "what's bothering you honey - was it the speeding ticket we got?" - "Eh yeah it was actually!" <truth - that béan garda in her leathers - I'd definitely make her leave the boots on - phoaah!> she senses distance/untruth.

From experience - I would have to state some women are just too nosey about what goes on in their guys head! This is not an Irish cultural phenomenon - but a 'cosmo phenomenon imho! '

From my understanding of the female psyche...

Women know that men are unfaithful in their minds all the time - and have to wreck sound relationships because of this! Unfaithful = shagging someone else not just thinking about it; or being turned off by her - which can be triggered by her - SO YOU FANCY THAT BEAN GARDA IN HER LEATHERS DO YA!

Insecurity is the killer - you can find someone like this - love her - register the need to keep filling the bucket which has a hole in it with love - she is a bucket with a hole - it will always eventually empty - doesn't matter what you do- give everything you've got - and realise it was never enough - she has custody of the kids - and you'll get to see them for 150 hours over the next 365 days... or the she's moved thousands of miles away.

Children are weapons= custody visitation rights - Women have too much power here -re: family law... I'm glad the public transport is the main reason I hate this country - just wouldn't want to be some of my friends is all...

Kell

Wicknight wrote:

But TC they don't turn to the ones that are there .. how is making more support groups going to solve the problem if men don't go to support groups in the first place.

To suggest that men in Ireland (lets deal locally first) are all of a sudden, after years of repressed emotional outpouring, are going to all of a sudden have the faculties to fly in the face of adversity from everywhere and go and do something about it is asking just a bit too much.

Womens support agencies have been around forever, from the cottage knitting industry of 19 o splash to today. The closest we ever got to that in the early years was the gentlemans clubs, where if you expressed emotion you were more than likely ousted.

Wicknight- you are suggesting that Irish males are supposed to change our social programming almost overnight and stop whining? And you dont see your contribution to the problem? Remember, girlies are good at emotional stuff. Blokes generally are not. Dont expect that to change in a persons lifetime.

K-

Kell

Wicknight wrote:

the reality that in the modern world women are more likely to pick a mate than the man is, and that women are just as confused about what they really want as well.

Wicknight wrote:

They were pretty happy the way things were till the women just upped and did it and now men are sitting around going "what the f**k just happened".

Men did not choose to re-arrange their roles, women plagued them for as long as they could remember to change into semi-women. As for your statement about women seeking emotional depth from sexual encounters? What planet are you from? I refer you to the point I made earlier about women waking up and deciding that they are going to behave like bad mannered men.

You aptly stated that women are more likely to choose their partners now. I suggest they always did. With the exception of rape a guy will not get laid without the consent of a female. A girl can turn to a guy with the "fancy a fúck line" and generally get their way. A guy cant. Who has sexual supremecy then? Who realistically has it all?

And will you ever learn how to spell INTIMIDATED? Next person who says intimated when they mean intimidated gets shot.

K-

Zombrex

Kell wrote:

Wicknight- you are suggesting that Irish males are supposed to change our social programming almost overnight and stop whining? And you dont see your contribution to the problem? Remember, girlies are good at emotional stuff. Blokes generally are not. Dont expect that to change in a persons lifetime.
K-

I have never ever said that men have to stop whining. Will everyone please stop thinking they know what I am saying and actually read my posts, cause it is starting to really piss me off. You think I am calling for men to stop whining about emotions (I have never said that, or even implied that, quite the oppossite actually) and TC got completely fixed on a denial about conscription I never even made :rolleyes:

I have also never said it would be easy to get men as a social group to open up, or that it would should take place over night. In fact I believe the exact oppoisite, which is why looking around for an external scape-goat for the reason men bottle up emotions is counter-productive (women!, lack of support groups!, discrimination!). Having a scape-goat wouldn't actually solve any of the problems because the root of the problem have very little to do with the scape-goat. There are support groups for men out there, men don't go to them. There is no serious link that I (or apparently TC) can find that shows suicide is seriously effect by discrimination in Ireland. Suicide rates are much higher in workplaces and industries where men have little contact with women. People calling for more support groups deflects from the real issues and as such counter-productive.

The entire social structure of men is based around not expression emotions. That is not something that you can change over night, not by a long way, but it is where the focus of attention should be if any change is ever going to happen.

Kell

Deleted User wrote:

It was an interesting reference, that I hadn't heard before. Would be another decent factor as to why Suicide is growing among teenagers...

Its been going on forever- ref Alanis' song Perfect. Its not a new phenomenon.

K-

Zombrex

Kell wrote:

Men did not choose to re-arrange their roles, women plagued them for as long as they could remember to change into semi-women. As for your statement about women seeking emotional depth from sexual encounters? What planet are you from? I refer you to the point I made earlier about women waking up and deciding that they are going to behave like bad mannered men.

I am talking about real relationships Kell, not friday night nite-club sexual politics, something most people grow out of after the reach 25.

Kell wrote:

You aptly stated that women are more likely to choose their partners now. I suggest they always did.

They didn't. Your parents generation (ie 70s) were probably the first generation where women were had much of a say in picking partners

But this is all off topic.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

I am talking about real relationships Kell, not friday night nite-club sexual politics, something most people grow out of after the reach 25.

well, isn't the suicide rate highest amount young males in Ireland? not.. 50 year olds?

*shrug*

Kell

Wicknight wrote:

The entire social structure of men is based around not expression emotions.

Dont understand you use of English. Please re-iterate.

You incessantly do not accept that the "modern woman" is causing a serious dent in the traditional male role and causing him no end of pain, when male poster after male poster etc ad nauseum states that as he reads it, women are responsible, directly (not just through feminism) for a lot of mens problems.

If you take it that all these replies are the male emotional outpourings to what males believe the problem to be, you are effectively doing what it is you pertain to not do i.e. shun blokes.

You havnt stopped for a moment to ignore your argument with TC, Klaz, and Zulu to actually answer the original point.

K-

Zombrex

Kell wrote:

A girl can turn to a guy with the "fancy a fúck line" and generally get their way. A guy cant. Who has sexual supremecy then? Who realistically has it all?
K-

BTW what point are you trying to make with that statement, or does it just piss you off and you are venting?

Kell

Wicknight wrote:

I am talking about real relationships Kell, not friday night nite-club sexual politics, something most people grow out of after the reach 25.



They didn't. Your parents generation (ie 70s) were probably the first generation where women were had much of a say in picking partners

But this is all off topic.

I dont know what age you think I am but 25 was a few years ago for me, nor are my parents of the 70's generation.

And, you have just illustrated you intense stupidity by suggesting that women didnt have a choice. Of course they did. Added to that, you suggested that it was off topic.

I wrote the fúcking topic and I havnt forgotton its purpose. Unlike you.

K-

Zombrex

Kell wrote:

Dont understand you use of English. Please re-iterate.

Kell if the only think you want to contribute to this discussion is that I have bad spelling please read the rules for this board and then piss off before you get banned. :rolleyes:

Kell wrote:

You incessantly do not accept that the "modern woman" is causing a serious dent in the traditional male role and causing him no end of pain, when male poster after male poster etc ad nauseum states that as he reads it, women are responsible, directly (not just through feminism) for a lot of mens problems.

I do except that modern women are totally confusing modern men. What I do not exact is that it is their fault or that they should blamed or that we should focus change on to women.

What do you suggest we do? Should we ban the modern women Kell?

Men have to learn to deal with there new place in society. I suggest they do that by focusing more attention on their own emotional self instead of just getting blindly angry at women. The alternative to that Kell is to bring the clock back, turn back womens lib, and make women like they were 100 years ago, ie managable and non-threatening.

Sleepy

Wicknight, let me ask you a few questions:

Why do you believe that women should have all the power in choosing partners?
Why do you want to believe that men aren't discriminated against in any fashion?
Why do you believe that there is such thing as a feminist movement any more in the western world when patently, the feminist movement was a thing of the 70's which had reached their goals by the late 80's?

Now kindly stop referring to Feminazis as Feminists. You're insulting a massive number of people (a large percentage of whom would have been men until the late 80's). Ivanna Bacik (sp?) and her counterparts in Irish culture are not feminists, they're feminazis. Or actually, come to think of it: are you Ivanna Bacik?

Zulu

Wicknight wrote:

Who said anything about bawling like a little baby. Do you seriously believe that the alternative to men bottling up serious emotions is that they run around crying like babies while trying to score women. Who said anything about scoring impressing women for that matter??

You did, don't you remember? Here let me remind you:
"men who are friends, are constantly in competition with each other, because we as males define are self worth as how successful we are compared with other people. Who here hasn't bosted about the fact they scored when none of their mates did. It is primal, instinctive, because we are after all animals, and as animals we compete for status and sex against each other."

Wicknight wrote:

I am talking about men being able to openly share depression and emotion with friends who are women, the same way women share emotions with other female friends. Are you saying that that is not possible? That men, as a rule cannot share emotions with close female friends because females get as uncomfortable discussing emotion with male friends as other men do?

No I'm not saying that at all. What I'm saying is that SOME men have issues discussing these things, and that this is most probably, a big factor in the issues modern man faces.

Why does it have to be "as a rule", or "all", or "always" with you?

Wicknight wrote:

They actually don't, not directly The majority of women feel pressure to be thin because of womens media and other women.

Oh, now that's interesting. Men don't work in womens media? Perhaps this is an area "The Corinthian" could exploit in that discrimination argument you were trying to tie him down to. Men are very VERY influential figures in both the fashion and media world. I won't bother pointing out how you've just contradicted yourself here, perhaps someone else would be so kind?

Wicknight wrote:

Yes they feel this pressure because they want to be "attractive," but the pressure does not come directly from men.

Women are all lesbian then? I would have felt that if women wanted to be "attractive", they would want to be "attractive" to men (in the most part), and thus the pressure would come from men, but I wouldn't be so presumptuous.

Wicknight wrote:

So forgetting men for a minute, we need to educate women to be more open with feelings and more willing to talk about emotions, which they currently don't do. Right?

Here we go again! Always with the extremes. No, don't forget about men for a minute. Men are a part of society as much as women. We all know women are far more open with their emotions.

Wicknight wrote:

What i am saying is targetting "society" as a whole is pointless, because the message will be lost.

No it's not. Society is a product of two sexes. There is 3 different types of relationships there. Male/male, female/female, and male/female. Treat them as individual entities and you only have 2 relationships.

Wicknight wrote:

For a start I am not talking about your girlfriend, I am talking about females in general. If the only girl you know is your girlfriend, and you feel you can't talk to her about depression it is even more a reason why the education should be tragetted at males because these are your friends, who you should be able to turn to without fear.

Male attitudes do need to change, that is a factor, but that is only part of the problem/society.

Wicknight wrote:

Do you even know what prejudiced means?

I indeed do. I'll assume, seeing as you asked, that you don't, so for your benefit: "A preconceived preference or idea." To keep things simple for you, I'll put it in context. You are making continuous assumptions about women and what they actually want.

Kell

Wicknight wrote:

Kell if the only think you want to contribute to this discussion is that I have bad spelling please read the rules for this board and then piss off before you get banned. :rolleyes:

Erm, I did not actually know what you were talking about but thanks for proving that you are taking everything said to you personally, proving that you have no objectivity in the matter at all.

I dont suggest that we ban the modern woman, I suggest that women should not behave badly towards men and expect impunity. One minute you are telling me that not all women are not the sexual predator acting like bad mannered men on Friday nights, then you are saying that this is the modern woman. As you suggested to Zulu earlier, time to make up your mind.

K-

Zombrex

Sleepy wrote:

Why do you believe that women should have all the power in choosing partners?

God you talk about this as if it is a game of football, or cards.

I never said I believe women should have "all the power" in choosing partners. I don't even understand what that question means! What "power". Who gives, or talks away this power? You talk about this as if it is a game with rules and that women are playing unfairly, breaking the "rules".

I believe women should have the right to choose who they want to be with, and they should have the right to express this openly.

Do you think women should not be able to choose who their partners are?

Sleepy wrote:

Why do you want to believe that men aren't discriminated against in any fashion?

LOL ... oh my god.

Now I think you don't even bother reading my posts, you just jump to assumptions. I have never said I believe men are not discriminated against, in fact I have said on a number of occations that men are discriminated against. What I have said is that there seems to be no evidence that discrimination against man is a serious factor in Irish male depression and suicide, as apposed to any other reason. This seemed to really really piss people off and yet so far no one has put forward any evidence that it actually is a serious factor. TC wanted to argue about the harmful effects of conscription in Paraguy instead :rolleyes:

Please bother to read my post before you come out with ridiculous statements such as that.

Sleepy wrote:

Why do you believe that there is such thing as a feminist movement any more in the western world when patently, the feminist movement was a thing of the 70's which had reached their goals by the late 80's?

Says who? You, a person who thinks all feminist today are Nazis, but at the same time seems to be complaining that women shouldn't be able to choose their own partners.

Yeah, definitly no need for feminism anymore :rolleyes:

Zombrex

Kell wrote:

Erm, I did not actually know what you were talking about

Maybe it was the other Kell who wrote this then :rolleyes:

And will you ever learn how to spell INTIMIDATED? Next person who says intimated when they mean intimidated gets shot.

Dont understand you use of English. Please re-iterate.

Kell wrote:

I dont suggest that we ban the modern woman, I suggest that women should not behave badly towards men and expect impunity. One minute you are telling me that not all women are not the sexual predator acting like bad mannered men on Friday nights, then you are saying that this is the modern woman. As you suggested to Zulu earlier, time to make up your mind.

Oh sweet jesus.

You think that a woman who goes up to a man and chats him up, goes home with him and shags him, is behaving badly?

Zombrex

Zulu wrote:

You did, don't you remember? Here let me remind you:
"men who are friends, are constantly in competition with each other, because we as males define are self worth as how successful we are compared with other people. Who here hasn't bosted about the fact they scored when none of their mates did. It is primal, instinctive, because we are after all animals, and as animals we compete for status and sex against each other."

And...

I am not denying men want to score women. I am asking you why do you think the only time a man would show emotion in front of a women is when they wanted to score them?

Zulu wrote:

No I'm not saying that at all. What I'm saying is that SOME men have issues discussing these things, and that this is most probably, a big factor in the issues modern man faces.

Yes, some men have issues discussing emotions. So why focus attention on changing the attitudes of women, who seem to be quite open to discussing emotions with friends and partners. It would be counter-productive and rather pointless.

Zulu wrote:

Why does it have to be "as a rule", or "all", or "always" with you?

It doesn't, that is the point! You want society to change, ie EVERYONE, when really focusing attention on everyone is pointless, effort would be far better spend focusing attention towards the men themselves and their male friends.

Zulu wrote:

Oh, now that's interesting. Men don't work in womens media? Perhaps this is an area "The Corinthian" could exploit in that discrimination argument you were trying to tie him down to. Men are very VERY influential figures in both the fashion and media world. I won't bother pointing out how you've just contradicted yourself here, perhaps someone else would be so kind?

You are grasping at straws, let it go. Or if you want to convince me tell me how many of the top leading 25 womens magazine have male editors (who aren't gay).

Zulu wrote:

Women are all lesbian then? I would have felt that if women wanted to be "attractive", they would want to be "attractive" to men (in the most part), and thus the pressure would come from men, but I wouldn't be so presumptuous.

It doesn't come from men. The want to feel attractive compared to other women. Seriously this isn't rocket science. Women compare themselves to other women, and other women in media (models, television presenters, actors) that are held up as being "attractive". The asspire to the perfect body image, that for most is unattainable. It can lead to eatting disorders, depression, and ironically comfort eatting and weight gain.

Zulu wrote:

Here we go again! Always with the extremes. No, don't forget about men for a minute. Men are a part of society as much as women. We all know women are far more open with their emotions.

Ok, then why are you calling for women to be focused on as much as men?

You are now contradicting previous posts. I said focus should be put on men and how they bottle up emotions and you said no!, women are as much to blame!. Now you are saying women are far more open with emotions, and we should not forget about men!!

Seriously, dude, get it together

Zulu wrote:

No it's not. Society is a product of two sexes. There is 3 different types of relationships there. Male/male, female/female, and male/female. Treat them as individual entities and you only have 2 relationships.

And now we are back to saying we must focus attention on women as much as men. Why exactly do we need to convince and encourage women to share emotions when they, by your own admittion, already do?

Zulu wrote:

Male attitudes do need to change, that is a factor, but that is only part of the problem/society.

Well I think it is a pretty major one, and a pretty good place to focus attention.

Zulu wrote:

I indeed do. I'll assume, seeing as you asked, that you don't, so for your benefit: "A preconceived preference or idea." To keep things simple for you, I'll put it in context. You are making continuous assumptions about women and what they actually want.

How about you start with the first definiton from www.dictonary.com

An adverse judgment or opinion formed beforehand or without knowledge or examination of the facts.

How is it an adverse judgment to say that women look for emotion in sex over physical gratification. Is that a bad thing, am I being unfair to women :rolleyes:

Wicknight

Wicknight wrote:

I have also never said it would be easy to get men as a social group to open up, or that it would should take place over night. In fact I believe the exact oppoisite, which is why looking around for an external scape-goat for the reason men bottle up emotions is counter-productive (women!, lack of support groups!, discrimination!). Having a scape-goat wouldn't actually solve any of the problems because the root of the problem have very little to do with the scape-goat. There are support groups for men out there, men don't go to them.There is no serious link that I (or apparently TC) can find that shows suicide is seriously effect by discrimination in Ireland. Suicide rates are much higher in workplaces and industries where men have little contact with women. People calling for more support groups deflects from the real issues and as such counter-productive.

Wicknight, I'm not suprised we're mis-understanding you, because you seem to have problems understanding yourself.

You've said that you're interested in equality, and have helped people in the past in this area, and yet, when the same sympthoms that have women have faced, start appearing for men, you decide there is no discrimination or nothing to fix. The pointing out of factors that affect Men in Society and their low self-esteem, is nothing different to what Feminists have done
for decades. Women have blamed men, tradition, fashion, lack of support etc as reasons for keeping them down. And even when you're equal to us, you still believe that you're discriminated against.

Do you even believe that equality can be achieved for women?, cause I think they've already gotten it.

And yet, now that men have decided or rather been forced into change, you've decided that the method of analysing where these stresses come from, have no place in the process of fixing it. IUf you don't know what causes, a problem, how do you expect to fix it?

There are indeed support groups (www.mens-network.net) out there for men, for things from cancer to alcohol abuse. I'm not denying that.
However, there are very very few support groups (You're welcome to find some for me) that cater for those men that feel discriminated against.

Discrimination in Ireland for men IS a FACTOR in the number of suicides in Ireland. Is a main reason, no. There IS NO ONE REASON.But it does have some bearing on peoples opinions, and the reactions they have to events. i.e. suicide.

Wicknight wrote:

The entire social structure of men is based around not expression emotions. That is not something that you can change over night, not by a long way, but it is where the focus of attention should be if any change is ever going to happen.

It is? cheers. I never knew what the whole social structure of men is based on... I'm amazed you understand us so well. :P

You seem intent on focusing on one factor. Its amazing. many posters have pointed out many factors, and yet you can't seem to believe that guys are complicated enough to be affected by more than one problem.
Fix this one thing, and you'll be free. Wohoo!!

Wicknight wrote:

It is confusing. For a lot of men it is annoying. But what do you suggest, that we force women to act in ways that we find more managable? Women have the right to be what ever they want to be, men have to learn to deal with this, they have to find their own role in society. Blaming women for changing and then getting mad because we now don't
know how to fit into this new world is pointless. And that is a change that must come about by men, through men and for men.

I have no problem with women being who they wish to be. Really I don't. They're welcome to it. I have a view as to how my potential girlfriend/wife should be when/if i meet her, but women as a whole? I quite like finding out the differences.

But womens opinions of how men should be, does affect us. You seem to believe that all advertising, is created by men, but rather it is a fairly equal ratio of male/female advertisers. Womens opinions of how men should be can be seen on many advertisements that you see on TV. We're exposed to those opinions throughout our lives, and expected to conform to those opinions. Women are exected to behave a different way by both men & women, but they've found the movement that allows them freedom from those opinions (somewhat). Men haven't yet, and your posts to date, just reiterate, that men can't follow the same method that women achieved their freedoms.

Klaz wrote:

When was the last time you were in a nightclub? Actually tell me where it is in Ireland that women as a whole will approach guys themselves..... because in all the clubs i've been in I can count the number of times (on one hand)
a woman has approached me or any of my friends in a club.. Tradition, that women like. guys approach, women choose. You're fooling yourself, if you think that has changed in any major way.

Wicknight wrote:

Women choose... you hit the nail on the head right there mate. Women choose their partner for the night. The men don't. The men have very little power in the situtation, and all the 101 tips and guides make very little difference to this. Men like to think that they will get the bird they want in a night club, but the simple fact the power and choice is competely with the woman.

Yes, women choose, they don't act. You said that women make the approaches in a club. They don't. Its tradition that guys make the approaches, and the women choose. That has not changed. Women seem to want equality and yet, keep all the advantages they had prior to that freedom. And I could point out numerous more examples of this.
Thats not equality.

Klaz wrote:

Actually many of the misconceptions that guys have towards women are generated by women themselves. Treat women like a gentleman, be a friend, be reliable, etc etc. Generated by women, with the aim of continuing to receive the same perks they've been getting for years

Wicknight wrote:

It is a "perk" to have a boyfriend who treats you nice?

And you say we aren't really reading what you say?

I didn't say anything about treating your girlfriend nice. I mentioned the common misconceptions that women have encouraged that men should behave. You still haven't answered, or rebutted what I said.

Wicknight wrote:

Well in my experience women want to be treated with loving respect. I think you are still listening to the 101 Ways to Pull Birds.

Woa! Where did I say I believed in the 101 ways to pull a bird? If you want to know what I believe works, ask me in a pm. I don't like advertising my beliefs in this regard, but I'll tell you if you really want to know.

Wicknight wrote:

Part of my issue with all this sex in advertisments is the notion that there is a way to treat women to make them be attracted to you, and it goes back to the idea of control. Men want to know the seceret so they feel they have control over the situations.

Where do you get this rubbish? Attraction (in advertising) is based on control? crap. Attraction is based primarily, on a physical craving for flesh against flesh. Men & women (the modern woman you keep mentioning)want sex. That is why sex is sold everywhere. But don't abuse yourself with this notion too much. Many men want more than sex,
and modern advertising knows this quite well.

I couldn't tell you what advertising aimed at women is based on. I've never thought about it.

Wicknight wrote:

Of course it is all bullsh*t, there is no "way" to treat women that makes them fall at their knees, all women are different, just like all men are different. Men get confused when they begin to hear conflicting advice, just like you seem to be saying. Oh women tell us they want to be treated like ladies, but then they want the "bad-guy", then they swap again and want us to treat them like equals, then they want the door opened. For a start who are these "women"! I have never meet a woman that had exactly the same views as another.

Tell me something. You're a woman, right? Have you ever had a date with an apparent "asshole", or "bad boy", and within the year changed your mind and had another date with a "nice" guy? Most of the women I know will admit that
their tastes change, and will alternate between what they view as the two types of men.

And for a method that works on most (not all) women, there are a few ways. Take a look at NLP, Patterning etc

Wicknight wrote:

Men need to stop worrying about what "women" want and start thinking about what the woman sitting in front of them wants. Or even forgetting that stop worry about what women want all together. If you don't want to hold the door open for a women, then don't. If she complains, who cares.

You've finally said something that I agree with.

Klaz

Klaz wrote:

Actually no it doesn't. Prick-tease actually comes from women on sexual powertrips. Prick-teasers are also women who go out to clubs, with the actual aim of getting drinks bought, just from flirting. This is quite
prevelant among young women of 16-19 that go to clubs. (I know a few that will fully admit it, and don't see anything wrong with it) Wicknight, I don't know if you're male or female, but you have some really odd notions....

Wicknight wrote:

Oh sigh ... if the woman said to the man, "we will have sex tonight", the man buys her drinks and then she pisses off, then yes what you are saying is correct.

But that doesn't happen. The woman doesn't say anything about sex. The man buys her drinks because he believes if he does then he will get sex. That is an assumption on the part of the man. When he doesn't, he gets pissed
off because he believes he didn't get what he paid for. He directs this anger towards the woman, who actually hasn't done anything and calls her a pricktease.

where are you getting this from? I gave an example of what happens and you go off on a different tangent.

I never mentioned sex. These girls/women flirt with guys, they're attractive and they know the power they have over many guys. So they flirt and lead the guys on. They initiate the conversations, then lead & pace the interactions, and pump for the rewards. Sure the guys are foolish, but the Girls/women ARE prick-teasers.

I have a friend that while in the US, went around the bars telling the guys that it was her Birthday. So she would get a drink from someone and move on. She admitted that sometimes she would ask the same guy on subsequent nights, and be caught.(she did this for about 6 months) She took advantage of these guys for their foolishness. IS she a bad person? No. She's not. But she plays the game like a pro, and knew all the angles.

And as for the sex element, I have a friend that once said no to sex off a girl outside of a club. She hit him across the face. Isolated element completely. But not all guys, fall into your category.

Zulu

Wicknight wrote:

I am not denying men want to score women. I am asking you why do you think the only time a man would show emotion in front of a women is when they wanted to score them?

Your point was about being sucessful and scoring; about women loving that kind of thing (showing emotion), I pointed out you are wrong in that respect.

Wicknight wrote:

Yes, some men have issues discussing emotions. So why focus attention on changing the attitudes of women, who seem to be quite open to discussing emotions with friends and partners. It would be counter-productive and rather pointless.

I beg to differ - so does every other male posting here. I feel that men can be equally afraid to display emotion to women as well, and this also needs to be delt with.

I personaly don't cry in public. I don't do this to impress other men. I don't really care what other men think of me. I'm more concerned with women to be honest.

Wicknight wrote:

You are grasping at straws, let it go. Or if you want to convince me tell me how many of the top leading 25 womens magazine have male editors (who aren't gay).

Editors account for the whole industry? Who picks all the models? Women as well?
"You are grasping at straws, let it go."

Wicknight wrote:

It doesn't come from men. The want to feel attractive compared to other women. Seriously this isn't rocket science.

Yes, thats right, women don't care what the men think. :rolleyes:

Wicknight wrote:

Women compare themselves to other women, and other women in media (models, television presenters, actors) that are held up as being "attractive". The asspire to the perfect body image, that for most is unattainable. It can lead to eatting disorders, depression, and ironically comfort eatting and weight gain.

This is true to a certain extent - but why do they do this? Is it to attract men or women? What is their ultimate goal?

Wicknight wrote:

Ok, then why are you calling for women to be focused on as much as men?

Because I feel they too are a contributing factor. I feel that lip service aside, most of the women I know have expected certain things from me, the same qualities they saw in there male role models growing up; the same emotionally retarded men of the last generation.

Wicknight wrote:

You are now contradicting previous posts. I said focus should be put on men and how they bottle up emotions and you said no!, women are as much to blame!. Now you are saying women are far more open with emotions, and we should not forget about men!!

I'll say it again for you. I'm not contradicting myself - pay attention:

Women are more in touch with their emotions. Women are more open with their emotions. Men have issues being open with their emotions because they feel society expects them to be strong. Society is made up of men and women.

No contradictions.

Wicknight wrote:

And now we are back to saying we must focus attention on women as much as men. Why exactly do we need to convince and encourage women to share emotions when they, by your own admittion, already do?

Don't put words in my mouth.
What I'm saying is: We need to change societies expectations on men.

Wicknight wrote:

How about you start with the first definiton from www.dictonary.com

You really are annoying. I am using the defination I ment to use. I am using that defination because:
That is what I said, and that is what I wanted to say.

Wicknight wrote:

An adverse judgment or opinion formed beforehand or without knowledge or examination of the facts.

This is what YOU misunderstood me to say/wanted me to say. Get over it.

The Corinthian

Wicknight wrote:

TC got completely fixed on a denial about conscription I never even made :rolleyes:

I demonstrated a connection between cases of discriminatory behaviour towards men and an increase tendency towards depression and suicide. You dismissed / ignored one case (without addressing it) and declared one inadmissible on the basis that it did not apply to Ireland (which makes the principle on which it’s based less valid because?). When, repeatedly, challenged as to whether you denied that there was a connection between cases of discriminatory behaviour towards men and an increase tendency towards depression and suicide, you have repeatedly failed or simply refused to answer. As such one can only take it as a denial through omission.

And it is this denial that makes any form of reasoned debate impossible as you are considering the issue from the entrenched position whereby the fault must be with men and women must be blameless and oppressed.

Of course women are still discriminated again, but the phenomenon of male discrimination has also grown in the last 35 years too. Unfortunately, recognition of this is slow, in part due to traditional male attitudes (not unlike some of the traditional female attitudes that rejected Feminism in the 1950’s) but also because it is seen simply as a backlash or even threat to the achievements of Feminism by those who share your political intransigence.

I remember writing a piece for one of the national papers when Disclosure came out as it was hugely controversial movie. What amazed me at the time was how incredulous people were that a man could be sexually harassed, some even joked about how they wished they were harassed more often, and to be honest the film itself didn’t help in that regard, because the thought of being sexually harassed by a sexually aggressive Demi Moore was not exactly a fate worse than death (frankly had they used Cathy Bates in that role, it might have carried the message over a little better).

Things have changed, people are actually beginning to understand that these things do happen, but it’s attitudes, such as yours Wicknight, that continue to perpetuate such assumptions as women always make the better parent or that it’s natural for the man to do any heavy (or not even so heavy) lifting - and sure, it’s good exercise for the lad!

Sleepy wrote:

Ivanna Bacik (sp?) and her counterparts in Irish culture are not feminists, they're feminazis.[/b]

Actually, IMHO, in fairness to Feminism, she’s more a political opportunist and self-publicist than any kind of Feminist. Good one at that - probably get elected soon enough. Terrible person though.

Zombrex

Deleted User wrote:

where are you getting this from? I gave an example of what happens and you go off on a different tangent.

I never mentioned sex. These girls/women flirt with guys, they're attractive and they know the power they have over many guys. So they flirt and lead the guys on. They initiate the conversations, then lead & pace the interactions, and pump for the rewards. Sure the guys are foolish, but the Girls/women ARE prick-teasers.

Lead men on. How exactly do they do this. Do they say "we will have sex tonight if you buy me drinks?", do they say "I will love you forever if you buy my drinks?" What exactly does the woman do that makes the man buy her drinks??

A girl flirts with a guy and the guy buys her drinks. Why does the woman have to do more than that else she be called a prick-teaser.

Just because the man is buying her drinks does not mean the woman owes him anything in return.

Deleted User wrote:

I have a friend that while in the US, went around the bars telling the guys that it was her Birthday.

That is not prickteasing. That is lying. If I say to TGI Fridays that it is my birthday and they bring me out a free cake I am lying but I am not prickteasing the waitress.

Notice the "prick" in the phrase "prickteasing". I means to imply that something sexual is on offer and then not let it happen. The girl teases the mans prick/dick and then doesn't let anything happen (not actually, it is a metephor).

What i am saying is the girl doesn't have to imply sex is on offer, the man will assume it anyway, even if the girl makes no indication it is, and will call the girl a prick tease if he thinks he was in with a shot but doesn't get sex.

Deleted User wrote:

But not all guys, fall into your category.

Never said the did. I don't even know what my "category" is?

Zombrex

Zulu wrote:

Your point was about being sucessful and scoring; about women loving that kind of thing, I pointed out you are wrong in that respect.

I said women love that sh*t. I didn't say women will falling in love if you do it. I meant women like discussion emotions, in fact they love it, with friends family the family dog. I never implied or even mention that men would do it to impress women. You are just assuming you know what I am talking about without actually reading my posts.

Zulu wrote:

I beg to differ - so does every other male posting here. I feel that men can be equally afraid to display emotion to women as well, and this also needs to be delt with.

Men are afraid to show emotions. To women or to other men. So what exact do we need to change in women again??

Zulu wrote:

Editors account for the whole industry? Who picks all the models? Women as well?
"You are grasping at straws, let it go."

Yes, thats right, women don't care what the men think. :rolleyes:

Editors decide the whole industry yes. Editors choose the content and over all focus and message of a magazine. What you think the mail boy has much control over stuff.

I never said women don't care about what men think. I said that the vast majority of the pressure on body image that women feel comes from other women.

Zulu wrote:

This is true to a certain extent - but why do they do this? Is it to attract men or women? What is their ultimate goal?

Their "goal" is to feel good about themselves.

Zulu wrote:

Because I feel they too are a contributing factor. I feel that lip service aside, most of the women I know have expected certain things from me, the same qualities they saw in there male role models growing up; the same emotionally retarded men of the last generation.

Are you really telling me your female friends expect you not to show emotion around them, or to act like you are not depressed or sad. And if you do that makes them very uncomfortable and they are unable to deal with it?

Zulu wrote:

Women are more in touch with their emotions. Women are more open with their emotions. Men have issues being open with their emotions because they feel society expects them to be strong. Society is made up of men and women.

If men think their female friends expect them to be strong and not show emotion, but they actually don't, then how does changing female attitudes stop men think this way. Men will think this way anyway, just like they do now.

Zulu wrote:

Don't put words in my mouth.
What I'm saying is: We need to change societies expectations on men.

But the expectiation are what the men put on themselves because they believe the must be strong and not show emotion to succeed in society. We need to change mens expectations on themselves, and tell them that it is ok to express emotion.

Zulu wrote:

You really are annoying. I am using the defination I ment to use

Prejudice does not simply mean "A preconceived idea" I have an idea that it is warm in Africa. That is not a prejuicide against africa. :rolleyes:

Prejudice implies negativity, and you know it. You are using a rather ridiculous defintion to worm out of standing behind what you originally said.