How feminism destroyed real men

[Mass_SkinsFan]

LOL. Your right I don't know your preferences,but how bad could they be? Or should I even ask that question?

They're not TOO bad. Most parents would probably like to see their daughters dressed as I would prefer over what I see some teens and twenty-somethings of the female persuasion wearing these days.

And those 2 parties weren't meant for each other to begin with and luckily it ended hopefully before marriage or kids,because if it didn't they must not have been paying too much attention.

Thankfully it ended long before marriage or children ever became an issue. Though a perfectly good Brooks Brothers suit with a silk shirt, a nice tie and dress shoes DID pay the ultimate price at the end of the relationship.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

That was hundreds of years ago.

Societal standards change daily.

Maybe that's exactly part of the problem, Mooka. Maybe we'd be better off if we could actually set a standard and keep to it for more than say 30 seconds at a time.

[DarkLadyRaven]

Maybe that's exactly part of the problem, Mooka. Maybe we'd be better off if we could actually set a standard and keep to it for more than say 30 seconds at a time.

Has a societey ever stayed still ever? Europe changes-- the Roman Empire Changed, Christianity Changes( and branches off into denominations), Gaul aka France Changes, heck even animals changes (as an eviromental result)-- how do you expect anyone to stand still , when it has never happened before in human history

[Mass_SkinsFan]

Has a societey ever stayed still ever? Europe changes-- the Roman Empire Changed, Christianity Changes( and branches off into denominations), Gaul aka France Changes, heck even animals changes (as an eviromental result)-- how do you expect anyone to stand still , when it has never happened before in human history

I've got an even better example for you.... The Normans.... who changed SO MUCH and adapted SO COMPLETELY to the lifestyle and beliefs of the peoples they conquered that the adapted themselves right out of existance.

Is it easy or simple to remain loyal to the concepts at the base of a society.... NO. It never has been and never will be. That doesn't mean that it wouldn't be a better idea than blindly adapting to and accepting concepts that are contrary to the beliefs at the base of society.

[redskins2redskins]

They're not TOO bad. Most parents would probably like to see their daughters dressed as I would prefer over what I see some teens and twenty-somethings of the female persuasion wearing these days.

Thankfully it ended long before marriage or children ever became an issue. Though a perfectly good Brooks Brothers suit with a silk shirt, a nice tie and dress shoes DID pay the ultimate price at the end of the relationship.

Dresses and heels etc huh? That isn't bad for someone who likes to dress like that. Nothing wrong with dressing that way on occasion but not all the time,not for me anyway. I'm more casual then that,but it's really all in what a person gets used to.

So she destroyed some of his clothes,lol. It could have been worse right?

[DarkLadyRaven]

I've got an even better example for you.... The Normans.... who changed SO MUCH and adapted SO COMPLETELY to the lifestyle and beliefs of the peoples they conquered that the adapted themselves right out of existance.

Is it easy or simple to remain loyal to the concepts at the base of a society.... NO. It never has been and never will be. That doesn't mean that it wouldn't be a better idea than blindly adapting to and accepting concepts that are contrary to the beliefs at the base of society.

And what base would that be? Who decides the base?

[Mass_SkinsFan]

Dresses and heels etc huh? That isn't bad for someone who likes to dress like that. Nothing wrong with dressing that way on occasion but not all the time,not for me anyway. I'm more casual then that,but it's really all in what a person gets used to.

Not exclusively, but I will say that the grunge and prostitute looks that seem to be the standard for young women nowadays would not be in the closet. Obviously different people have different preferences, and look better in certain types of clothing and those things are taken into account. So far as I'm concerned it's more a philosophy than a real "laundry list"

So she destroyed some of his clothes,lol. It could have been worse right?

No, actually she was the one who bought the suit for him. He was much more comfortable in a t-shirt, torn jeans, and sandals. She tried to get him to dress much more professionally and upscale. When he finally revolted, he took the suit and accessories that were supposed to be the centerpieces of his new look and burned them in a trash barrel on her front lawn as a going away present.

[Prosperity]

did MSF just use a smiley face?

[Mass_SkinsFan]

And what base would that be? Who decides the base?

I've already discussed that, to a degree. I really think the base societal concept that this country was founded on would be a good one to use. There are some minor tweaks that would be included, but nothing that affects what we're talking about here.

[alexey]

Is it easy or simple to remain loyal to the concepts at the base of a society.... NO. It never has been and never will be. That doesn't mean that it wouldn't be a better idea than blindly adapting to and accepting concepts that are contrary to the beliefs at the base of society.

You're going to have to deal with change one way or another. Even the Amish have to do it, and boy do they try to avoid it.

and yes, seing change for what it is, that's very important... there are many ways of dealing with change... Things like judging and labeling fall under "blindly adapting"

Also, if one is unable to change, one may be very tempted to reason that a change is not needed.

[DarkLadyRaven]

I've already discussed that, to a degree. I really think the base societal concept that this country was founded on would be a good one to use. There are some minor tweaks that would be included, but nothing that affects what we're talking about here.

If that base was good enought it would have never changed-- it changed for a reason

[Mass_SkinsFan]

If that base was good enought it would have never changed-- it changed for a reason

I'm not so sure that's true. I think that a lot of adapting/changing in our society occurs either for the wrong reason or solely to say that there has been change. It's not really worth debating though. Neither of us is going to change our minds on the topic.

[redskins2redskins]

Not exclusively, but I will say that the grunge and prostitute looks that seem to be the standard for young women nowadays would not be in the closet. Obviously different people have different preferences, and look better in certain types of clothing and those things are taken into account. So far as I'm concerned it's more a philosophy than a real "laundry list"

No, actually she was the one who bought the suit for him. He was much more comfortable in a t-shirt, torn jeans, and sandals. She tried to get him to dress much more professionally and upscale. When he finally revolted, he took the suit and accessories that were supposed to be the centerpieces of his new look and burned them in a trash barrel on her front lawn as a going away present.

LOL,I don't blame you about the prostitute look being out,except for the bedroom huh;) You know I'm kidding with you.

I think that's cool that the guy was the one who burned the clothes,usually the story goes the other way around.:applause:

Women get all pissed off and react before they even think sometimes. Even I'll admit that.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

You're going to have to deal with change one way or another. Even the Amish have to do it, and boy do they try to avoid it....

....Also, if one is unable to change, one may be very tempted to reason that a change is not needed.

Some of us try harder than others, alexey. Whether it's because we don't agree with change in general, or because we don't care for the specific changes that are being made. I'm sure that you realize there are members of the Amish community who are still fervently against even the minor adaptations to modern society that some of the Amish have made.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

LOL,I don't blame you about the prostitute look being out,except for the bedroom huh;) You know I'm kidding with you.

I know you're kidding. I just think that look goes far beyond what's really appropriate in most public situations. What goes on in the bedroom is a totally different circumstance.

I think that's cool that the guy was the one who burned the clothes,usually the story goes the other way around.:applause:.

He tried getting all dressed up and doing the "respectable adult" thing and it just wasn't for him. She essentially told him that if he couldn't or wouldn't "grow up" that he didn't care enough about her for her to be with him. Two nights later he shows up at her house with a metal trash barrel, lighter fluid, the clothes she'd bought him, and a lighter.

[CandaceM23]

In the mindset obvious here on this board men are the villians, and women must be freed from their evil dominance. Which is of course, a political farce convenient for certain US politicians and has been engrained into US thinking via media and education systems. They can no longer see each other as men and women, with similarities and differences, who must mork together and that that IS the victory. Instead 'victory' is resisting the 'man' and all he stands for, which ends all possibility for teamwork or happily functional couples. Candace's response is a clear example of that mindset.

Are you kidding me? Seriously?

I don't see victory as resisting the man and all that he stands for. I don't understand where you get that from my posts ....

I've clearly said that I won't be direspected. PERIOD. If I am in a relationship, then I expect to be treated as a equal and to be respected. I won't be talked down to by a boyfriend, husband, brother, sister, fellow female, anyone really.

And I've never said that men are the obvious villian. Not all men are pigs and believe that women belong in the kitchen and should be submissive. There are many men out there who allow their wives/girlfriends to be an equal in the relationship and in life. Those men don't believe in this 1950's hoopla of women being submissive.

I take offense when men call me "Sweetie, hun, honey, darling, etc." You don't hear men calling other men those things ... why is it appropriate for a complete stranger or a male coworker to say those things? WHEN IS IT APPROPRIATE FOR A STRANGER OR A COWORKER TO SAY THOSE THINGS TO A WOMAN? It's not. Unless your coworker is your father, uncle, etc and it's used as a term of endearment.

How can you not expect politicians and other female rights supporters to not be vocal about their opinions. Look at how women were treated in years past. We were not allowed to vote, we were treated as submissives, we were not given the same benefits or wages of men, we have been looked at as objects of sexual glorification, etc. For those things to change, women and women's right supporters had to make a stand. They had to raise their voices. They had to demand change. Thanks to them, things are better than what they once were but they're not where they should be.

Women are still being passed over for jobs, women still aren't given the same benefits as men, women still are underpaid in comparison to their coworkers. Until women are given the same things that men are and until women are treated equally, you're going to hear about the suppression of women and feminism.

In order for victory be the ability to see each other as men and women, with similarities and differences, who must mork together - that takes work on both parts ... and right now, the negligent part is men. Women have been fighting to be on the same playing field as men for years ....

[CandaceM23]

I spent the night with Candace once. She kept me in a cage and fed me only stale bread and dirty water. It was the best night of my life.

You seriously made me almost pee my pants.

I love you Whoey.

[flashback]

I've got an even better example for you.... The Normans.... who changed SO MUCH and adapted SO COMPLETELY to the lifestyle and beliefs of the peoples they conquered that the adapted themselves right out of existance.

Is it easy or simple to remain loyal to the concepts at the base of a society.... NO. It never has been and never will be. That doesn't mean that it wouldn't be a better idea than blindly adapting to and accepting concepts that are contrary to the beliefs at the base of society.

As a descendant of Normans, I am offended by your assertion that I do not exist.

Seriously, what were they supposed to do, build longhouses to live in in Paris and London, build longboats to go sailing in the lake or the river on weekends? Heck, weren't those Normans doing Capital One commercials just last year?

I think you got adapting confused with ceasing to exist. The Normans were one of the most successful, innovative, and yes, adaptable people ever to walk the earth.

Also, by your logic, every group in the world execpt the ones walking around right now have ceased to exist. The Romans, the Goths, the Celts, the Saxons, etc. Heck, even America ceased to exist during the last mid-term election, didn't it?

Change is good. Change is the only constant. People, on the whole, were not happier 100 or 1,000 or 10,000 years ago than they are today. Join us in the open society of the 21st century, MSF. You might just like it.

[DarkLadyRaven]

And I've never said that men are the obvious villian

If you did it wouldnt make since to follow the Redskins, a team comprised of men playing a manly game. We would all be on a WNBA forum following a sport with women if we all hated men

[Prosperity]

You seriously made me almost pee my pants.

that sucks

EDIT: oh you wrote *almost* my bad :laugh:

[Mass_SkinsFan]

I've clearly said that I won't be direspected. PERIOD. If I am in a relationship, then I expect to be treated as a equal and to be respected.

That's fine. Where you and I seem to disagree is that you apparently (I could be wrong) want every woman to feel that same way; and any woman who doesn't, or Man who seeks a woman who doesn't feel that way is some neanderthal in your mind. Please correct me if I'm wrong on that.

And I've never said that men are the obvious villian. Not all men are pigs and believe that women belong in the kitchen and should be submissive. There are many men out there who allow their wives/girlfriends to be an equal in the relationship and in life. Those men don't believe in this 1950's hoopla of women being submissive.

But apparently all Men who do believe that women have a different place in the world than Men, IS a pig. Got it.

In order for victory be the ability to see each other as men and women, with similarities and differences, who must mork together - that takes work on both parts ... and right now, the negligent part is men. Women have been fighting to be on the same playing field as men for years.

I have to disagree. I really think that the problem is that Men and women are like two comlimentary gears in a machine. When they work together, each doing the job that they were designed for, things work wonderfully. Unfortunately as soon as they start trying to both do the same job, the machine ceases to function properly and at best production is reduced if not totally negated.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

As a descendant of Normans, I am offended by your assertion that I do not exist.

As a fellow descendant of the Norse (and possibly Normans as well); I know that I exist as well. Unfortunately I think we'd be better off if we lived more like our ancestors did than the way we do currently.

Seriously, what were they supposed to do, build longhouses to live in in Paris and London, build longboats to go sailing in the lake or the river on weekends? Heck, weren't those Normans doing Capital One commercials just last year?

No those WEREN'T Normans doing the Capital One commercials last year, but you'd probably need to be something of a history enthusiast to tell that. As for building longhouses in Paris or London... why not? More importantly though, the Conqueror generally imposes their lifestyle on the conquered, not the other way around. That was the mistake the Normans made. They conquered regions of France, Italy, Great Britian, and Antioch and then proceeded to become the people they'd just conquered instead of forcing those people to become Normans.

I think you got adapting confused with ceasing to exist. The Normans were one of the most successful, innovative, and yes, adaptable people ever to walk the earth.

I agree to a point. The problem is that instead of adapting the new concepts of the areas and people they conquered into their philosophy of life, the Normans gave up who and what they were to become the people they'd just conquered.

Also, by your logic, every group in the world execpt the ones walking around right now have ceased to exist. The Romans, the Goths, the Celts, the Saxons, etc. Heck, even America ceased to exist during the last mid-term election, didn't it?

To a large degree those societies HAVE ceased to exist. Including the American one.

Change is good. Change is the only constant. People, on the whole, were not happier 100 or 1,000 or 10,000 years ago than they are today. Join us in the open society of the 21st century, MSF. You might just like it.

Change is NOT always good. It isn't always bad either; but I'd guess more of it is for the bad than the good. Life isn't about happiness. It never has been and I don't believe I've ever said it was.

BTW - I've seen the travel brochure for the 21st Century and it's not for me. Either as a vacation spot OR as a place to move to.

[G.A.C.O.L.B.]

Life is all about happiness.

And I'm confused. If American society has ceased to exist what am I living in now? I don't want a definition, just a name.

[Pedro]

I've got an even better example for you.... The Normans.... who changed SO MUCH and adapted SO COMPLETELY to the lifestyle and beliefs of the peoples they conquered that the adapted themselves right out of existance.

Is it easy or simple to remain loyal to the concepts at the base of a society.... NO. It never has been and never will be. That doesn't mean that it wouldn't be a better idea than blindly adapting to and accepting concepts that are contrary to the beliefs at the base of society.

The Normans were descendants of Norsemen, who if they didn't change would never have become Normans. Also the reason they changed was because they had to. They stole everything they had via conquest and held it (look at all the castles in my country that they built) via military force. Once that military force was weakening they had to allow non Normans to own land etc or face an uprising they couldn't quash.

They didn't change out of choice.... they changed when they no longer had the power to subjigate the general populace. I don't believe society should demand a class, race, sex be subservient but if individuals want to follow that kind of lifestyle they should be allowed to.

[CandaceM23]

Mass, I've tried to exercise the strength to not respond to your posts. My thinking is that you and I clearly know that we don't see eye to eye on many things. Its like beating a dead horse.

I don't run around on a soapbox and preach to any available female ear. I don't walk around and demand rights for females. If a discussion presents itself, then so be it.

If a woman chooses to place herself in a situation where she's forced to be submissive, then that's her decision. It would be no surprise or shocker that I'd think that she's an idiot, but that's her choice.

Same goes for men. If you, my next door neighbor, the man across the way, or any of my coworkers decides that the females in his personal life need to be treated as slaves or be submissive to him, then that's his choice. Just don't ever treat me that way and expect it to be okay with me.

I am the way that I am because of what I've been taught. My parent have a great marriage and always have. My father treated my mother with respect and treated her as an equal. My mom has always been very open with my father and vice versa. Sure, they get into their arguements, but my father has never treated my mother as an inferior person in anyway. He has always been supportive of her and the decisions that she has made for herself and our family. My mother has always been included in all major and minor family decisions.

Seeing this interaction and respect throughout my entire life has only taught me to be the way that I am. My father and mother have taught be to be a stong individual.

You know just as we'll as I do that we're both set in our ways. You believe that a woman's role is one thing, meanwhile I believe something different. Do I believe that its wrong to treat women as inferiors, absolutely. Do I think that women deserve to be respected? Absolutely. In order to gain respect, you have to give respect. I just don't see respect as treating someone as inferior.