When men were men & women were feminine

[greybeard]

Once upon a time.
Men were men and females were pleased about that.
The roles were clearly distinguished.
The female, head of the home and the childs first teacher.
There was mutual respect-- at least in most cases.

The women made the house a home.
Men provided the finance as best they could and fixed things.
Men took of their hats as a salute to women --got up of their seats--opened doors.

Young men flirted outrageously--wolf whistled etc.
Women seemed to enjoy the attention and had many a quick retort.
In the main it was just good fun.
The great majority could take no for answer.
There was of course the "stop it I like it" expression.

Unfortunately a minority of men just went too far and now what have we got?

Some men are emasculated--afraid of offending---not being true to their nature--what ever that may be. Some go the other way--really over the top sexual suggestion.

Im all for equality but respect for the different attributes and abilities of both male and female.
Women now have to go to work to help to help support the perceived needs of todays society.
Enough is rarely enough.

We seem to have lost something along the way.

Chris

[scanner]

I don't think Men or Women have lost anything . We are deliberately being stifled, in private it is just the same as it ever was. Our treasonous leaders and statute makers treat us, both male and female, with contempt. Imagine how the GDP doubled over night, with Women now forced to work. Destroying the family unit was always their goal. Brexit, case in point, the majority voted to leave, no ifs or buts. Look at what has happened, contempt from our dictatorship.

I'm a traditionalist and believe in family and it's values. I don't believe in, nanny state interference, like we have now.

[yelik]

All by design thanks to the Rockefeller Foundation funding women's liberation.

https://relampagofurioso.com/2016/02/19/what-feminism-was-about/


The Rockefellers, funded Women’s Lib. And we’re the ones who got it all over the newspapers and televisions — The Rockefeller Foundation. You want to know why?”

There were two primary reasons. And one reason was:

“We couldn’t tax half the population, before Women’s Lib. And the second reason was: Now we get the kids in school at an early age. We can indoctrinate the kids how to think. So that it breaks up the family. Your kids start looking at the State as the family. As the school, as the officials as their family, not as the parents teaching them.” And so, those are the two primary reasons for Women’s Lib, which I thought up to that point was a noble thing. When I saw their intentions behind it, where they were coming from when they created it, the thought of it, I saw the evil behind what I thought was a noble venture.

The full interview can be seen on YouTube. It is one of the most interesting interviews on the intentions of the corporate-government complex to be found anywhere.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSGZ4Hkdyg4

[Bo Atkinson]

For a woman's experienced perspective on "what they did to schools", partly with respect to gender-control-roles:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDyDtYy2I0M

She has many videos, this came up 1st today...

[greybeard]

Most men would, I think, admit to not understanding women--me included.
The bottom line is that we are different.
One of the most helpful books I read is "Men are from Mars --Women are from Venus"
That brought some understanding.
The significant other must be the priority in your life.
You may get extra "points" for being a good provider but if your job becomes the main focus in your life--heaven help you.
Same goes for your hobby.
Done this
Female members of Avalon, your perspective on this thread is very welcome.

Chris

[Flash]

your text is, to me it seems, a dreamed of text, not ever near the reality.

Even in old times, men who where men, following your definition, were a very tiny tiny minority, mostly from the higher class, which had money and food.

the staving masses or those who had to work hard never had the time and energy left to be that feminine or masculine. They were just surviving with quite primitive means.

To better describe:

Men were working hard in the woods or hunting. If they were not, their family would starve, which many many family did because their men would be sleazy or drunk bas..., those wifes would have to work double for their children.

Women had no time for anything else than cooking and washing and being pregnant therefore taking care of a trolley of children, if not dying during delivery of one of them (30% of women would die giving birth). Believe me, after a few years of this, forget the 'feminine' look or attitude (which is a cultural concept anyhow, at least the way you describe it).

In most untouched societies, women still pair together for survival and help each other, not having that much from their men anyhow.

To me, after many years on this planet, I perceive us, humans, as in the same mammal make up as other mammals, like lions, where the female does most of the work (hunting for lions) and the male rest and sleep.

All todays stats says the same: women make 30% less than men on average, and work twice as hard in the workforce, which in fact makes a 70% differential. It was also that way in the old time. I have seen it my whole life. Very few woman really have the steady support of their male, independently of the culture, civilisation, or Rockerfellers of this world - the latter only utilised a pre-existing make up.

[Eagle Eye]

This gender equality thing that is being promoted at full potential, is one of the great damaging stuff we will get from a society. It has corrupted the position of men and women. If everything was done for good intention to humanity then they would have acted according to universal laws but this is far from it. Men and women are two different halves (two different worlds) with different positions, the weakest points of one is the strongest point of other, there is no visible equality but both make everything in balance.
What this system is trying to do is just equalizing two halves in the same way, that means to corrupt the human nature to its core.

[greybeard]

Flash thanks for your post but I can assure you my text is not dreamed--its my experience.
Maybe different country different era--mind I am 72.

My folks had a corner shop--at that time it was the hub of the community.
I worked in the shop, after school, from the age of nine onward.
Filling sugar in brown backs--getting paraffin for customers-delivering small messages.

So I had observation of the interaction of married couples and others in that community.
It was just after the war and it was all very real--food was still rationed for quite some time after.
Poverty was the norm but people did not think they were poor--they had enough just, though they had to somtimes put their purchase on the slate (pay later)
Respect was also the norm.

Chris

[greybeard]

I suspect the inequality in pay came about because it was perceived that males had more need of the money--they perhaps had a family to support.
Married women on the whole did not work --young ladys therefore were seen to be working without the financial responsibility of a married man.
Different times---not saying it was right

Chris

[Flash]

Flash thanks for your post but I can assure you my text is not dreamed--its my experience.
Maybe different country different era--mind I am 72.

My folks had a corner shop--at that time it was the hub of the community.
I worked in the shop, after school, from the age of nine onward.
Filling sugar in brown backs--getting paraffin for customers-delivering small messages.

So I had observation of the interaction of married couples and others in that community.
It was just after the war and it was all very real--food was still rationed for quite some time after.
Poverty was the norm but people did not think they were poor--they had enough just, though they had to somtimes put their purchase on the slate (pay later)
Respect was also the norm.

Chris

Well, I have lived in many countries, and what I described is pretty much what I have seen all over.

However, my dad was the knight you are describing. He worked all his life in a job he did not like, because he had to feed his family. He was respectful and loving as well. But, I can tell you that in my neighborhood, on about 10 neighbors when I was young, he was the only one like this.

Yes, everyone was more polite on the surface, but when it came for their daily life, hidden behind the curtains of their homes, it was not much better than today (2 male neighbors barely working and not providing for their family, one always screaming and barking at this wife and children, a third one providing but always drunk, a fourth one sleeping with his daughters, etc.). The whole shahinigan is just more in the open nowaday.

One difference though, which is major, is the hard drug intake that has risen considerably and make of human beings perfect beasts. We only had alcool years ago.

Believe me, I do not know many man who work doing things they do not like, for others, usually they give up instead, or their ego crumble and they become whatever, while I know many women working in order to feed their family, even if they do not like their work.

Lately I was talking to a friend of mine and her boyfriend. He was mentioning his old divorce problems from a previous marriage and the nasty way his ex got to him.

As I was listening, I told that I was surprised, because usually we hear those nasty behavior amongst women, talking together about their divorces from ex husbands, we rarely hear men mentioning such nastiness during divorce.

Then he said something surprising, from a man perspective: he said that his problem was that when in court, judges would not believe him, mainly because usually, 70% of the time, it is the men who are that nasty with their ex. He added that judges are used to men doing anything to get their way and avoid paying, so when a man is not doing that but on the contrary is the one subjected to incredible nastiness, while paying for everything, it takes that man twice as many proofs so that the judges wake up and start believing him.

It is the first time I heard a man openly stating what is obvious for most women (I had a few tell me in private that they despise the usual behavior of their male friends).

Those real knights are few in between.

[Flash]

Time for fun

But, when funny videos are made on the present topic, describing a catastrophy in terms of behaviors, there is some truth in it


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U5uMMsIYRKA

[greybeard]

I see the truth of your posts Flash.
Everyone has a dark side and that may erupt at home.
Outside the couple act as though the relationship is fine.
Now its easier for a couple to go their separate ways--but not always possible.

Not many Knights--not many Princesses either unfortunately.

I think most are in "Settle for land"
But thats ok--for many it works.

A joke, kind of.
"My husband became so successful that finally I could afford to divorce him."

Eckhart Tolle said that "The bad is getting worse and the good is getting better"
I suspect that's true

Chris

[greybeard]

What Im not getting across is that I suspect many men dont know where they stand --what their role is.

Now that is an assumption on my part.
I note that the female BBC presenters seem to talk at the bottom of their vocal range sounding almost like their male counterparts--and there seems to an air of, we don’t really need men, coming from some females.

Now I as a male want to feel that I am productive--not a waste of space--I like to feel wanted, even desired and that my attention to females in the opening of doors etc is appreciate--I have been accused of being patronizing---I can open the door for my self thank you, was one retort.

At my age I really dont mind--but I do have some thought for relationships in young couples.
A "job description" Lol might be a helpful aid.

All my posts are passing thoughts and there in no opinion set in concrete.

Chris

[Wind]

I highly recommend these videos of Jordan Peterson.

ewvqEqIXdhU
9WDXStamk9A
4hf1XvpiUYo

[A Voice from the Mountains]

your text is, to me it seems, a dreamed of text, not ever near the reality.

Even in old times, men who where men, following your definition, were a very tiny tiny minority, mostly from the higher class, which had money and food.

the staving masses or those who had to work hard never had the time and energy left to be that feminine or masculine. They were just surviving with quite primitive means.

I appreciate the attempt to make this into an issue of class struggle, but I don't think masculinity and femininity are just things that people do in their spare time when they aren't working.

They are states of being and working is one of the most masculine things men can do.

Taking care of children is one of the most feminine things a woman can do.

Instead of running away from our biological responsibilities as human beings (of two very distinct genders), it would be healthier and more constructive to find ways of embracing and enjoying them.

Masculinity and femininity aren't some kind of class struggle, Flash. The 60's are over and Marxist philosophies like what you are saying have only served to further divide people. Nor was ancient history anything like a class struggle like you describe. No one even thought in those toxic terms until Marx came along.

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Not many Knights--not many Princesses either unfortunately.

It becomes outdated to stand up for your wife's honor when she's slept with about 10 or 15 different people before marrying, is far from some fair maiden, and often "wears the pants" in the family anyway.

Chivalry originated with knights romantically attached to some unobtainable maiden, mostly virgins, daughters of nobility. There was recently an article stating the obvious, that men generally prefer to marry virgins who don't have tattoos and are debt-free (thus freeing them from working), rather than what universities tend to produce today, which is the exact opposite. By their early 20's, many women who attend universities today have been through the ringer in more ways than one and will be paying off student loans for years/decades. It's a very sad situation.

Men Prefer Debt-Free Virgins Without Tattoos (https://thetransformedwife.com/men-prefer-debt-free-virgins-without-tattoos/) - the blog article that set off a firestorm recently. Because it's true. It's not a comfortable truth, but I don't know of any man who would reject a woman on these grounds, I can tell you that.

It's not the same market for women that you enjoyed when you were younger, Greybeard. I'm not surprised that the number of "knights" has decreased since feminism took hold. There's hardly anything to left to honor.

[Valerie Villars]

One of the things missing in this discussion is the importance of the traditional feminine role in perpetuating the morals and culture of their families. It is women who traditionally carried on the rituals which are so important to maintaining a healthy sense of who we are.

Examples which come to mind are my great-grandmother's recipe for red beans and rice, having Christmas dinner and being certain manners would be required, etc.

We used to be the poles around which a life was lived and passed on. I really miss that part of male vs. female roles in today's culture.

[Ba-ba-Ra]

What Im not getting across is that I suspect many men dont know where they stand --what their role is.




Greybeard, Seven years ago, when my son who was in his early 40's at the time and was still dating, said the exact same thing to me.

He was confused: Some gals wanted you to open the door, others were insulted if you did - all of this put men off-balance: should they, shouldn't they.

Perhaps, since you Greybeard and I grew up in the same general decades, explains why my experience was much the same as yours.
Women were feminine, men were masculine. And yes, there were degrees on both sides, but not anywhere to the extent that I see now

There were unwritten rules of behavior that most followed. I suppose in the more wealthy neighborhoods that would be called etiquette
but that was not the type of neighborhood I came from
Mine was a neighborhood of working class, mostly factory workers or laborers, but there were these unwritten rules of engagement.
Lots of fun flirting. And the men asked the girls out.
And whatever was happening behind closed door, was not aired in public. That was to discuss with a family member or best friend - in private.

Flash, you may consider that deceptive, putting on a public face, but I call that good manners.
I'm very uncomfortable now, when out with couples who make digs at each other openly and with malice, over wine.
Not the time or the place, and how does that help the relationship by embarrassing your partner in public.

My perspective is that growing up in the 40's and 50's was a more innocent time. At 12 yrs, I was still dressing like a little girl
Now, many 12 yrs old girls are wearing short, shorts w/zipper undone part way. Or skirts so short that . . . well, you get my point.

Men are From Mars,etc. is a great book.
If you haven't seen the video, by same author, I recommend it. Very funny. It's probably on YouTube
I personally like that men are different

And in truth we are all different, unique.

The gay/lesbian community is finding out that living with your own sex can be just as complicated as living with the opposite.

But, back to heterosexual: My son once said: What men want most is respect, What women want most is attention.
I think Greybeard said something similar.
In truth, I believe we all want to be treated with respect

[greybeard]

Ba-ba-Ra thank you for this.
It really mirrors my thoughts on this, though I accept that people are so different that there is no norm now.
Quote Ba-ba-Ra
"But, back to heterosexual: My son once said: What men want most is respect, What women want most is attention.
I think Greybeard said something similar.
In truth, I believe we all want to be treated with respect "

Yes you got it---thanks.

Chris

[Carmody]

I see the truth of your posts Flash.
Everyone has a dark side and that may erupt at home.
Outside the couple act as though the relationship is fine.
Now its easier for a couple to go their separate ways--but not always possible.

Not many Knights--not many Princesses either unfortunately.

I think most are in "Settle for land"
But thats ok--for many it works.

A joke, kind of.
"My husband became so successful that finally I could afford to divorce him."

Eckhart Tolle said that "The bad is getting worse and the good is getting better"
I suspect that's true

Chris

Growth potential can be defined as the range available, within which to differentiate. Thus a higher high and a lower low, is definable as growth. Intelligence can be defined as range and/or scope, and so on.

Humanity growing, or humanity's growth... is, in all seriousness, higher highs and lower lows.

[Foxie Loxie]

Water seek its own level!! Wish I had known about that earlier in my own life! :ROFL:

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

Good thread, strangely synchronous, as I was in the midst of starting a similar thread on political correctness (and prob still shall), as it's been on my mind lately.

I'm well with you on this Chris, really good points, and many great comments in response. What to add? maybe a sort of devil's advocate observation...

This was years ago, early 90s, when political correctness really kicked in. Women were starting to complain about...well, male endorsement, let's say. I, like many men, couldn't understand what the fuss was about. And then I experienced something for myself...

It was around that time frame I took up an offer (caved into it really) and accompanied my best friend on a night on the town. Nothing unusual about that you might think, but truth is...me and him didn't quite move in the same social circles if you know what I mean. Normally, he would go with his 'friends' to his places, I would go with other friends to mine, and ne'er the twain shall meet. But this time, I took the plunge, and went with him.

To gay bars and clubs.

As a straight man, this was a strange experience. The fact my best mate is gay should tell you I am not homophobic. So that wasn't it. What I found strange was the sense of displacement, and 'otherness'. It was the looks I received, it was the stares I got, it was the comments, and brief over-friendly touches here and there I was subjected to. 'Who is this?' his social set said collectively. It appeared I was new 'meat' on the scene.

This went on for quite a while. At first it was...interesting, to get all that attention (if only they were female, I thought!). Then I got uncomfortable, self-conscious. I felt anxious, exposed, like a fresh kill surrounded by slathering hyenas. My friend was no help at all, he thought it was a wonderful joke. I guessed he enjoyed seeing me squirm. Eventually I fessed up to one of them. 'Sorry mate, I like girls. I'm straight!' It was like uttering something blasphemous in a holy place. After that, I was completely ignored. More than that, shunned!

(as an aside, that friend is still my best friend today).

This was an experience rather than a lesson. I was brought up with traditional Christian values and good-manners were a big part of that. But it provided a valuable insight into what was going on here. What I experienced that night is, I imagine, something akin to what some women must feel when targeted and singled out as a sex object by men. Granted, it's slightly different. A straight women likes men, a straight man (me in other words) doesn't. So maybe it was worse in my case.

But it still takes nothing away from a simple fact: Opening a door is one thing, that I have always done and shall continue to do unapologetically - particularly if it's a lady (it's just second nature to me). I would hope a woman would not find that offensive. If they do, I'm sorry - I don't think that's my fault!

But leering and whistling at girls, or crude jokes and sexual innuendo, even if meant harmlessly, is quite different! No one asks to be treated like that, no matter how they look or what they're wearing.

[Flash]

your text is, to me it seems, a dreamed of text, not ever near the reality.

Even in old times, men who where men, following your definition, were a very tiny tiny minority, mostly from the higher class, which had money and food.

the staving masses or those who had to work hard never had the time and energy left to be that feminine or masculine. They were just surviving with quite primitive means.

I appreciate the attempt to make this into an issue of class struggle, but I don't think masculinity and femininity are just things that people do in their spare time when they aren't working.

They are states of being and working is one of the most masculine things men can do.

Taking care of children is one of the most feminine things a woman can do.

Instead of running away from our biological responsibilities as human beings (of two very distinct genders), it would be healthier and more constructive to find ways of embracing and enjoying them.

Masculinity and femininity aren't some kind of class struggle, Flash. The 60's are over and Marxist philosophies like what you are saying have only served to further divide people. Nor was ancient history anything like a class struggle like you describe. No one even thought in those toxic terms until Marx came along.

this is not an issue of class struggle, but in all centuries, only the rich women could stay home and not work like slaves. Nothing to do with class as such, because these rich women were not more free nor more respected when it came to their daily life with their husbands.

This is a gender issue all along.

Please don't pick single phrases or paragraph out of context to make a point.

AND

I have never been Marxist - how did you come to infer such stupidity.

You are definitely mixing everything here. I told you few months ago, in another thread, that I would not answer to you anymore, because you constantly infer things and deform my writings.

Here, I make a point for the rest of readers here, but will not pursue answering your obnoxious deductions.

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Right. You're not trying to make gender into a class struggle, it's just about rich and poor. As if that is not exactly the same thing. And as if Marxists aren't always trying to make everything into class warfare between the rich and poor. If it walks like a duck....

[greybeard]

Everyone is right in their own way as their posts relate to their experience.
Ultimately an opinion is a thought.
Thoughts come and go.
ACIM states "If you hold an opinion realize you are identifying with an illusion."

As im fond of saying, its all levels of awareness/consciousness.
All is very real for the beholder but then life is duality--opposites--ups and downs --the seeming correct and incorrect.

Shakespeare said "Nothing is right or wrong till thinking makes it so"
Thats correct at one level.

So no need to disagree.

Chris

[greybeard]

The intention of the thread was to set up discussion on the suppression of femininity and masculinity..
Suppression-- is perhaps too strong a word, eroding of tradition values perhaps a better expression.

Is that a good thing or otherwise?
A complex subject.

Chris

[greybeard]

Im only human--smiling.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RpimiNvcRC4

[shaberon]

All by design thanks to the Rockefeller Foundation funding women's liberation.

https://relampagofurioso.com/2016/02/19/what-feminism-was-about/


The Rockefellers, funded Women’s Lib. And we’re the ones who got it all over the newspapers and televisions — The Rockefeller Foundation. You want to know why?”

There were two primary reasons. And one reason was:

“We couldn’t tax half the population, before Women’s Lib. And the second reason was: Now we get the kids in school at an early age. We can indoctrinate the kids how to think. So that it breaks up the family. Your kids start looking at the State as the family. As the school, as the officials as their family, not as the parents teaching them.” And so, those are the two primary reasons for Women’s Lib, which I thought up to that point was a noble thing. When I saw their intentions behind it, where they were coming from when they created it, the thought of it, I saw the evil behind what I thought was a noble venture.

They may not have exactly started a legitimate concern for women's rights or equality, but did they take over the movement and use it for these purposes, yes. Why were they already taxing the male half, income tax, one of their first major successes. They shouldn't be taxing either one. Don't give them any money, it only justifies poor behavior.

Romance or knightly chivalry is not a Western or European culture. It comes straight from Islamic poetry. Other than this, marriages have always mostly been fixed, the marriage simply a form of property transfer from her father to the husband.

Even in the 1900s there was not much eye to labor rights; in the states, we mostly owe it to a sixteen year old kid from the New York docks.

Almost all of western history shows the squashing and suppression of human rights of almost every kind, mostly due to looking at human beings as a form of property, mostly originated from privileged males. Prior to industrialization, peasants worked only about half the time. They stopped during bad weather and the numerous religious or saints' days. Once you had factories, then even from around the 1600s you could put a woman to work 14-16 hours a day, make her buy her own candles to see, and dispose of her if she lost fingers to the machinery or something like that. Not much different from the four year old specialists in coal mines.

Anyone who questioned this status quo was a brave pioneering soul, and it seems natural that once the questions came up, authorities have two responses: one for public relations, such as Britain stopping slavery. Secondly, for takeover: oh you want some rights, we'll build a nanny state for your complete dependence, and what you knew as individuals and families will be washed out. Now I suppose we could add multiple ways of eliminating gender all together, whether physically from the use of pesticides, or psychologically from the wealth of babble one may obtain.

Men and women mostly are wired differently, but from the perspective of spirit, a human being is asexual.

[scanner]

We're all one step from GRACE .

uY1ev6zmtD4

[greybeard]

Yes scanner thanks for this post
The Rag & Bone Man can sing and some great songs--pointing the way I suspect.

Chris

[Flash]

All by design thanks to the Rockefeller Foundation funding women's liberation.

https://relampagofurioso.com/2016/02/19/what-feminism-was-about/




The Rockefellers, funded Women’s Lib. And we’re the ones who got it all over the newspapers and televisions — The Rockefeller Foundation. You want to know why?”

There were two primary reasons. And one reason was:

“We couldn’t tax half the population, before Women’s Lib. And the second reason was: Now we get the kids in school at an early age. We can indoctrinate the kids how to think. So that it breaks up the family. Your kids start looking at the State as the family. As the school, as the officials as their family, not as the parents teaching them.” And so, those are the two primary reasons for Women’s Lib, which I thought up to that point was a noble thing. When I saw their intentions behind it, where they were coming from when they created it, the thought of it, I saw the evil behind what I thought was a noble venture.

They may not have exactly started a legitimate concern for women's rights or equality, but did they take over the movement and use it for these purposes, yes. Why were they already taxing the male half, income tax, one of their first major successes. They shouldn't be taxing either one. Don't give them any money, it only justifies poor behavior.

Romance or knightly chivalry is not a Western or European culture. It comes straight from Islamic poetry. Other than this, marriages have always mostly been fixed, the marriage simply a form of property transfer from her father to the husband.

Even in the 1900s there was not much eye to labor rights; in the states, we mostly owe it to a sixteen year old kid from the New York docks.

Almost all of western history shows the squashing and suppression of human rights of almost every kind, mostly due to looking at human beings as a form of property, mostly originated from privileged males. Prior to industrialization, peasants worked only about half the time. They stopped during bad weather and the numerous religious or saints' days. Once you had factories, then even from around the 1600s you could put a woman to work 14-16 hours a day, make her buy her own candles to see, and dispose of her if she lost fingers to the machinery or something like that. Not much different from the four year old specialists in coal mines.

Anyone who questioned this status quo was a brave pioneering soul, and it seems natural that once the questions came up, authorities have two responses: one for public relations, such as Britain stopping slavery. Secondly, for takeover: oh you want some rights, we'll build a nanny state for your complete dependence, and what you knew as individuals and families will be washed out. Now I suppose we could add multiple ways of eliminating gender all together, whether physically from the use of pesticides, or psychologically from the wealth of babble one may obtain.

Men and women mostly are wired differently, but from the perspective of spirit, a human being is asexual.

Exactly, your assessment Shabrron is very near reality -nothing to do with marxism for god sake!!

Thinking that men-women relationships were much better in the past is often seen from a male point of view and more often yet from dreamland, not in touch with what truly was

[Praxis]

All by design thanks to the Rockefeller Foundation funding women's liberation.

https://relampagofurioso.com/2016/02/19/what-feminism-was-about/




The Rockefellers, funded Women’s Lib. And we’re the ones who got it all over the newspapers and televisions — The Rockefeller Foundation. You want to know why?”

There were two primary reasons. And one reason was:

“We couldn’t tax half the population, before Women’s Lib. And the second reason was: Now we get the kids in school at an early age. We can indoctrinate the kids how to think. So that it breaks up the family. Your kids start looking at the State as the family. As the school, as the officials as their family, not as the parents teaching them.” And so, those are the two primary reasons for Women’s Lib, which I thought up to that point was a noble thing. When I saw their intentions behind it, where they were coming from when they created it, the thought of it, I saw the evil behind what I thought was a noble venture.

They may not have exactly started a legitimate concern for women's rights or equality, but did they take over the movement and use it for these purposes, yes. Why were they already taxing the male half, income tax, one of their first major successes. They shouldn't be taxing either one. Don't give them any money, it only justifies poor behavior.

Romance or knightly chivalry is not a Western or European culture. It comes straight from Islamic poetry. Other than this, marriages have always mostly been fixed, the marriage simply a form of property transfer from her father to the husband.

Even in the 1900s there was not much eye to labor rights; in the states, we mostly owe it to a sixteen year old kid from the New York docks.

Almost all of western history shows the squashing and suppression of human rights of almost every kind, mostly due to looking at human beings as a form of property, mostly originated from privileged males. Prior to industrialization, peasants worked only about half the time. They stopped during bad weather and the numerous religious or saints' days. Once you had factories, then even from around the 1600s you could put a woman to work 14-16 hours a day, make her buy her own candles to see, and dispose of her if she lost fingers to the machinery or something like that. Not much different from the four year old specialists in coal mines.

Anyone who questioned this status quo was a brave pioneering soul, and it seems natural that once the questions came up, authorities have two responses: one for public relations, such as Britain stopping slavery. Secondly, for takeover: oh you want some rights, we'll build a nanny state for your complete dependence, and what you knew as individuals and families will be washed out. Now I suppose we could add multiple ways of eliminating gender all together, whether physically from the use of pesticides, or psychologically from the wealth of babble one may obtain.

Men and women mostly are wired differently, but from the perspective of spirit, a human being is asexual.

Exactly, your assessment Shabrron is very near reality -nothing to do with marxism for god sake!!

Thinking that men-women relationships were much better in the past is often seen from a male point of view and more often yet from dreamland, not in touch with what truly was

This one thousand times. Funny that many women dont start similar threads pining for the past like this. I wonder why that is. . . .

side note:


Shouldnt the title read something more like "When men were masculine and when women were feminine"?

[greybeard]

I see what you are saying Praxis ( Shouldnt the title read something more like "When men were masculine and when women were feminine"? )

However men are still masculine but not so sure of them selves as far as I can see.
Its a question of knowing your role so to speak.
Its just a question of definition.
Also being a role model.

So many families are now just a one parent situation--I cant see that this is beneficial.

To be clear I never claim to be right or even to hold an opinion---its a may be so.
Things change.
My perception, awareness is based on non-duality teachings.

How is Joe?
I seem to remember that he is a mutual friend correct me if im in error.
Chris.

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Greybeard, what policies or other influences do you think are responsible for the erosion of gender roles in your lifetime?

[greybeard]

Greybeard, what policies or other influences do you think are responsible for the erosion of gender roles in your lifetime?

Basically materialism.
We are fed a diet of advertising which implies you will be respected, loved, happy,special if you buy our product.

Sex sells---look at the videos of girl singers--soft porn.
Young girls want to be successful in this field and buy their clothes and wear them like the pop idols.
Male singers much the same--you have to tick all the boxes to get a hit record.
A disposable society.
If you look at the likes of Roy Orbison --he just stood there and sung.
Now the guys and females have to sing dance be a certain age--but will their career be short or long?

Some of the young singers have really good voices--its just a pity that most dont last.

The state will provide for a young single mother.
So for some unhappy at home its a temptation to get pregnant and get a place of their own--man is surplus to requirements in some cases.
Job done--where is the mutual respect, support and caring in that.

I m probably talking about exceptions to the rule.
There are many young people who look for a loving long term relationship and respect their partner.

It is as it is.

Chris

[AutumnW]

Greybeard, you're up for some controversy here, you brave soul!

There has been an erosion in male femal relationships as the sexes are losing some polarity. Unfortunately that doesn't mean that all differences between the sexes is culturally produced.

But--- the culturally imposed desire to eradicate all differences between the sexes has produced a social environment where women are encouraged to feel that they should aspire to behave the same way as the most romantically lazy men. Thus, you have a hook up culture in young people that satisfies the demands of the culture by cheapening and coarsening sex. People become disposable to one another. This drives atomization which feeds addictions and materialism. That is perfect for the corporatocracy.

Nothing is sacred, nor is sex particularly important. Even the animal kingdom has elaborate rituals around courtship and mating that serve all sorts of purposes. In the human species it was likely a huge driver of evolution of the mind. It is a huge mental work out to do it well. Just as athleticism was important in the past, the male who had smarts (sense of humor) was more likely to find a receptive mate or mates. This held true for women as well, but not to the same degree.

So culturally, the act of sex without significant meaning harms everybody.. The lack of respect that ensues isn't exclusively gender related but rather an erosion of our humanity. Reducing the sex act down to just the act is deplorable. It doesn't rise to the level of being animal like. I don't even know how to classify it.

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Greybeard, what policies or other influences do you think are responsible for the erosion of gender roles in your lifetime?

Basically materialism.
We are fed a diet of advertising which implies you will be respected, loved, happy,special if you buy our product.

I notice you didn't mention anything like the sexual revolution of the 1960's, women's liberation getting women out of the house and into the work force, the redefinition of marriage, or anything like that.

So you think materialistic consumerism eroded gender roles in your lifetime, but none of those things I just mentioned, which are actually directly related to ideas of gender conformity?

[greybeard]

Greybeard, what policies or other influences do you think are responsible for the erosion of gender roles in your lifetime?

Basically materialism.
We are fed a diet of advertising which implies you will be respected, loved, happy,special if you buy our product.

I notice you didn't mention anything like the sexual revolution of the 1960's, women's liberation getting women out of the house and into the work force, the redefinition of marriage, or anything like that.

So you think materialistic consumerism eroded gender roles in your lifetime, but none of those things I just mentioned, which are actually directly related to ideas of gender conformity?

yes the things you mention too.
I wanted to leave the topics up to others to expand on the subject.
I am interested in the replies but writing at length I cant do now--dyslexic and age --pain in the finger joints and elsewhere.
its accepted as normal for my age.

Chris

[A Voice from the Mountains]

But--- the culturally imposed desire to eradicate all differences between the sexes has produced a social environment where women are encouraged to feel that they should aspire to behave the same way as the most romantically lazy men.

Bingo.

If someone were growing a tomato plant, and I came by and peed on it every day, and it died, it would require a fool to believe that the tomato died because of the weather.

In the same way, you have certain ideologues (and we all know who I'm talking about) attacking the very idea of gender identity consistently for decades. Suddenly, men are acting like women and women are acting like men. Who can argue with a straight face that this is all irrelevant to the problem at hand?

We can't correct a mistake if we can't admit we've made one. We've made some massive mistakes here and future generations will be paying for it for a long time.

[greybeard]

I just threw a pebble in the pond to see what ripples materialized.
A talking point.
To my mind as consciousness rises all will evolve according to this.
There is tremendous potential--where that may take the male and female relationship,humanity in general, I have no idea., but I do hope that respect and love will flourish.

Chris

.

[Pam]

your text is, to me it seems, a dreamed of text, not ever near the reality.

Even in old times, men who where men, following your definition, were a very tiny tiny minority, mostly from the higher class, which had money and food.

the staving masses or those who had to work hard never had the time and energy left to be that feminine or masculine. They were just surviving with quite primitive means.

To better describe:

Men were working hard in the woods or hunting. If they were not, their family would starve, which many many family did because their men would be sleazy or drunk bas..., those wifes would have to work double for their children.

Women had no time for anything else than cooking and washing and being pregnant therefore taking care of a trolley of children, if not dying during delivery of one of them (30% of women would die giving birth). Believe me, after a few years of this, forget the 'feminine' look or attitude (which is a cultural concept anyhow, at least the way you describe it).

In most untouched societies, women still pair together for survival and help each other, not having that much from their men anyhow.

To me, after many years on this planet, I perceive us, humans, as in the same mammal make up as other mammals, like lions, where the female does most of the work (hunting for lions) and the male rest and sleep.

All todays stats says the same: women make 30% less than men on average, and work twice as hard in the workforce, which in fact makes a 70% differential. It was also that way in the old time. I have seen it my whole life. Very few woman really have the steady support of their male, independently of the culture, civilisation, or Rockerfellers of this world - the latter only utilised a pre-existing make up.


Maybe what you have said is true in your experience, but mine doesn't bear out what you are saying in the least. How do you know women work twice as hard in the workplace? How would anyone know?I certainly have not seen this to be true and I am a woman. Your 30% less salary stat is bogus, at least in the US. It is very easy to manipulate statistics. There are distinct differences between the genders. You have described some of them in your post. Who was it that was out hunting food? Males. Why not the females if they are so hard working? Because they were the ones that had the kids, and nurtured them. Women do not have the strength, nor the aggressive tendencies that men can muster to hunt, generally speaking.

Your vast generalization the very few women have the steady support of their male, does the male have the steady support of the female, or have you even considered this?

Undoubtedly, their are many differences between males and females, which should be accepted. This ridiculous idea that women can copy and better everything a male does is really a form of adulation, although I'm sure most women wouldn't see it that way. One of our biggest deficits as women is that we are strongly driven by emotions, which can sometimes cause us to make decisions based strictly on the moments emotion rather than objectively analyzing a situation and tempering that with emotional input. Women seem to be far more fluid in their way of doing things and men are more linear in their task performing. Women are more prone to drama and men far less so(although that could be changing). Of course, there are always exceptions.

[greybeard]

peterpam I think that is a very honest post from your perspective and one that I agree with in the main.

thanks
Chris

[petra]

Ba-ba-Ra thank you for this.
It really mirrors my thoughts on this, though I accept that people are so different that there is no norm now.
Quote Ba-ba-Ra
"But, back to heterosexual: My son once said: What men want most is respect, What women want most is attention.
I think Greybeard said something similar.
In truth, I believe we all want to be treated with respect "

Yes you got it---thanks.

Chris

Thanks for the bold and interesting topic!

I agree with the general sentiment "What men want most is respect, What women want most is attention."

I don't require respect... but I DO require NO DISRESPECT :)

I don't crave attention... but I do crave affection which I think is very close to the same. I'd pick affection over respect all day long.

Safety is also a big motivation for me. If I had to pick affection vs safety, I'll take the safety.

[greybeard]

A side issue is the mobile phone.
The conversation with the one on the other end is more important than who you are with.
You will see several young people walking down the street and they are all into the conversation on the mobiles.

Its an eroding of respect for the company your with.
Its as though we are conditioned to believe it better some where else or with some one else.
Addiction to video games--virtual reality more important than the one your with.

Then there are TV programs like" House wives of" (you name it)
Its all look at what ive got--even down to the latest inplant.
The Kardashians programs seemingly got started through a porn clip on u tube.

The red carpet --news all about who showed the most flesh.

Im not prudish --a time and place for everything
and whats natural is not nasty.

However I think it downgrades the female --gives the wrong impression in particular to young girls and men.

Ch

[Flash]

your text is, to me it seems, a dreamed of text, not ever near the reality.

Even in old times, men who where men, following your definition, were a very tiny tiny minority, mostly from the higher class, which had money and food.

the staving masses or those who had to work hard never had the time and energy left to be that feminine or masculine. They were just surviving with quite primitive means.

To better describe:

Men were working hard in the woods or hunting. If they were not, their family would starve, which many many family did because their men would be sleazy or drunk bas..., those wifes would have to work double for their children.

Women had no time for anything else than cooking and washing and being pregnant therefore taking care of a trolley of children, if not dying during delivery of one of them (30% of women would die giving birth). Believe me, after a few years of this, forget the 'feminine' look or attitude (which is a cultural concept anyhow, at least the way you describe it).

In most untouched societies, women still pair together for survival and help each other, not having that much from their men anyhow.

To me, after many years on this planet, I perceive us, humans, as in the same mammal make up as other mammals, like lions, where the female does most of the work (hunting for lions) and the male rest and sleep.

All todays stats says the same: women make 30% less than men on average, and work twice as hard in the workforce, which in fact makes a 70% differential. It was also that way in the old time. I have seen it my whole life. Very few woman really have the steady support of their male, independently of the culture, civilisation, or Rockerfellers of this world - the latter only utilised a pre-existing make up.


Maybe what you have said is true in your experience, but mine doesn't bear out what you are saying in the least. How do you know women work twice as hard in the workplace? How would anyone know?I certainly have not seen this to be true and I am a woman. Your 30% less salary stat is bogus, at least in the US. It is very easy to manipulate statistics. There are distinct differences between the genders. You have described some of them in your post. Who was it that was out hunting food? Males. Why not the females if they are so hard working? Because they were the ones that had the kids, and nurtured them. Women do not have the strength, nor the aggressive tendencies that men can muster to hunt, generally speaking.

Your vast generalization the very few women have the steady support of their male, does the male have the steady support of the female, or have you even considered this?

Undoubtedly, their are many differences between males and females, which should be accepted. This ridiculous idea that women can copy and better everything a male does is really a form of adulation, although I'm sure most women wouldn't see it that way. One of our biggest deficits as women is that we are strongly driven by emotions, which can sometimes cause us to make decisions based strictly on the moments emotion rather than objectively analyzing a situation and tempering that with emotional input. Women seem to be far more fluid in their way of doing things and men are more linear in their task performing. Women are more prone to drama and men far less so(although that could be changing). Of course, there are always exceptions.

Oh, for god sake. You are asking me where I got the idea women work twice as hard, contesting it, you tell me that stats can be manipulated, and then you go on a spree of insubstatiated women behavior as being prone to drama, emotional, yourself generalising quite a lot while acusing me of doing it. etc etc.

It may be your behavior, but certainly not the behavior of the thousands of women and men I met in my life, clerks, secretaries, managers, and a quite a few high level professionals.

This is where I observed the quantities of work of females versus males collegues (not all males, but a good 60% same work load more pay or less work load more Pay).. at their workplace. and I know about every profession salaries in Canada as well as the split between women and men.

I did not need stats because I observed it, but the stats confirm my observations. Good.

Why don’t you do your own research before writing and trying to demolish someone’s else writings based on facts.

Women do not need this attitude from a peer towards their own gender, and men do not need that either, it does not help either gender.

Facing reality is much more helping for both sexes

[petra]

Greybeard, what policies or other influences do you think are responsible for the erosion of gender roles in your lifetime?

Basically materialism.
We are fed a diet of advertising which implies you will be respected, loved, happy,special if you buy our product.

Sex sells---look at the videos of girl singers--soft porn.
Young girls want to be successful in this field and buy their clothes and wear them like the pop idols.
Male singers much the same--you have to tick all the boxes to get a hit record.
A disposable society.
If you look at the likes of Roy Orbison --he just stood there and sung.


Yes yes, it's as if TV is telling us what we're supposed to be like. I was fooled for a while too. You probably remember when porn had pubic hair in it (I'm not old enough to remember ha ha). Well now you never see pubic hair in porn - and why is this, I wonder cynically? :P

I laughed real hard at the comment about Roy Orbison, thanks for that!



The state will provide for a young single mother.
So for some unhappy at home its a temptation to get pregnant and get a place of their own--man is surplus to requirements in some cases.
Job done--where is the mutual respect, support and caring in that.

I m probably talking about exceptions to the rule.
There are many young people who look for a loving long term relationship and respect their partner.

It is as it is.

Chris


How revolting. Surplus... I can think of it from the woman's perspective too, and he's not just surplus - he's also a source of child support payments. When I think of women plotting against men in this way, it kind of makes me sick.

I see it happening, I see the disdain for one another. But you're right, those are the exceptions - the "odd ones". You know there's something wrong when the basketball players need to take their condoms with them when they leave...

[Violet]

I concur with both sexes wanting to be treated with respect.

Problematic nowadays is probably also how media including social, dictate this perception of respect.
Sometimes, when I turn off my brain, and I put on some or other reality show, I see all these...clones of men and women and they're constantly fighting with one another: women with women, men with women, men with men.

Lots of fighting, also about hurt feelings and respect. They use sentences like: You're not showing any respect, that was so disrespectful of you, don't talk to me like that, NEVER talk to me like that, you don't talk to a woman like that, who do you think you are coming in like that and talking to me like that, oh and a horrible amount of swearing too...

So what I'm trying to say is, if you're a youngster and you look at how gender roles are presented in shows like that and you copy that into whatever social relationship...I don't know, it just doesn't seem to promote dialogue or mutual understanding, with each party simply barking - and quite inelegantly at that too - they want to be respected...NOW.

But what do youngsters perceive as respectful treatment?
Would the previous generations have felt equally respected under those terms?

Respect is - despite a fixed set of generally agreed upon "manners" - a fluid concept.

Personally, I think it would help a lot if people would be more patient with one another and not so quickly jump into defence. In a climate of patience there is also room for a learning trajectory that will allow you to learn what a relationship at hand requires to be perceived as respectfull by all its participants.

[greybeard]

When a man is fully supported by a woman he becomes more productive, works harder, because he has reason to be.
A woman’s appreciation is a great motivator to most men.
In the same way when a woman is fully appreciate valued and respected by a man then you have a valuable family unit.
The children grow up in a caring environment and will do the same when they have children.
The community benefits from those with stable caring relationships.

Chris

[greybeard]

Being some what contraversal and frankly stirring it a little--smiling.
I note that mot respondents are female and thats great.

However It seems that men have become some what apologetic for being men.
Of course there can be valid reason for apology--even being contrite but!!!!
Men step up to the plate here--lol

Germaine Greer said "You cant blame men for being men"

I would like to remind that here is nothing personal--you are not your opinion
People may disagree --best of friends do but the disagreement is with the opinion.
Never a need to defend an opinion.

Chris

Ps many a true word said in song

Billy Currington -- Off My Rocker

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WdmjT62Kuc

[greybeard]

What men are really good at


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XtMy5IBmX7E


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKpQRjj_WbU

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Being some what contraversal and frankly stirring it a little--smiling.
I note that mot respondents are female and thats great.

However It seems that men have become some what apologetic for being men.
Of course there can be valid reason for apology--even being contrite but!!!!
Men step up to the plate here--lol

Germaine Greer said "You cant blame men for being men"

I realize this is Hollywood, but it's also a pretty accurate depiction of how men used to be in this country, before Zionists flooded our country with feminism and soy.

9X67RmNdwpQ

I love these old westerns for reminding us what kind of people founded our nations, and giving us positive examples of masculine role models, instead of these fake Hollywood feminists you see all over TV today who are raping people behind closed doors, or these pansies like Justin Trudeau who spend all day apologizing for being born with a penis.

Notice that there is a healthy and principled "boys, have at it" attitude throughout the clip.

Men used to follow value and honor principles, like:

1) You never hit a woman. Women are to be protected, and only cowards hit women.
2) You never shoot an unarmed man, for the same reason. Only cowards do that.
3) You give the opportunity for a fair fight. You never shoot a man in the back.
4) You fight your own battles, and give others the dignity and respect to fight their own too.
5) Authority is flexible and equanimous, and doesn't have to be heavy-handed to get its point across. It leaves room for the community to be able to police itself, which is infinitely more democratic than allowing a group of thugs to go around beating and arresting people on a whim, like all of the corrupt police departments in big cities do today.

My great grandpa used to run a ferry across a river. He once punched a man in the face and knocked him into the river just for refusing to stop cussing in front of a woman. And I respect him for that. No one got the law involved, because the guy deserved it, and the law wouldn't have done anything anyway. Today they'd probably lock him up for 6 months and apologize to the loud mouth. That's a woman's idea of justice, or a beta male.

A lot of people today would find the very idea of punching someone in the face horrifying today, as if it's the worst thing that could ever befall someone (unless they're "punching a Nazi" of course), but then again a lot of women also complain about chivalry being dead too. You can't have it both ways, because real chivalry means protecting women from unpleasant experiences.

And that's not a bad thing. That's something that men can take pride in, something to inspire them, something to make them into better people.

[greybeard]

I appreciate your post A Voice from the Mountains.
"Authority" via the law wants to control every situation by rules and regulation.
What you said about your great grandpapa seems to me to be the way it should be cept im not into physical violence.
Your 5 points I agree with.

chris

[greybeard]

By coincidence there are several threads now on the topic the erosion of masculinity.
This thread touches on this too.
Chris

[greybeard]

Fear driven
Divide and conquer.

What was once considered banter --flirting-- is now--you tell me.
In my youth young women were well able to counter unwanted attention--look after them selves.
Obviously there are exceptions to every blanket statement.

However fear is the biggest controller used by the manipulating powers.
For the greater good of the human race!!! Oh Yeah!!!
Well if you believe that, you have really fallen for the lie.

C

[Bill Ryan]

For all those who are interested in this important topic, here's a companion thread:


The Decline of Modern Man (Masculinity) (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?103824-The-Decline-of-Modern-Man--Masculinity-)

[greybeard]

I can see how part of this came about.
Career women perceived that in order to hold a management position they had to compete with men.
So basically they became like men in many ways.
Some men became the "House husband"
Doing all the things that women used to do at home
Now if you have skill with people, can sell yourself, be internet and laptop competent, then it does not matter if you are female or male.
Just so long as you can do the job.

Before men were very much respected as tradesmen.
They identified strongly with their occupation and the skill there in.
Not quite the same respect, in this day and age, for office managers--male or female.

Men used to be able to fix the family car--no matter what went wrong --fitting new parts.
Now you need special tools and the car engine is run by a computer.
So men felt valued and respected.

Women also were respected greatly--they made clothes, knitted, fed the family.
In short they were looked up to by males.

Thats the thought of today.
Chris

[Helene West]

There's a shrink who's been on the air for over 40 years. Some of you may have heard of her when several years ago some little liberal race baiter tried to frame her for being racist and the lib media took the ball and ran with it as they have always hated her traditional values. Anyhow she's in her '70s and going strong on sirius radio.

She would not only agree with the repulsive trend being spoken about here but she considers the situation dire as she listens to thousands of people call in to her show, mainly marrieds with children but all kinds of relationship problems.

I'm only mentioning her as she is giving a 6 week video course in:

"The Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands"

as she feels feminism has produced women who don't know how to be a wife. You may want to check it out and pass it on if you are trying to relate to a Fembot of any degree. The ad is on the first page of her site. https://www.drlaura.com

[A Voice from the Mountains]

I had to get a girlfriend from Brazil to find someone even remotely feminine, who enjoys cooking and wears dresses instead of basketball shorts and jeans. She's into all the kinds of dainty things you'd traditionally think of as feminine. She even mocks American women for wearing basketball shorts and jeans, but that's the state of the modern West.

Henry Kissinger, btw, does not consider South America part of the Western world. Maybe this is part of the reason why: they haven't been brainwashed into turning their women into wannabe men.

Asian women are also still extremely feminine, at least by modern Western standards.

[greybeard]

Humans are a bunch of hypocrites

The state wants to put everything in a box.
Anything out with the box is judged as unacceptable.
That's a tool of separation--suits the so called elite who do what they want anyway.

As far as relationships go monogamy is seen to be judged the right relationship, polygamy not right and so on.
Polygamy worked for quite a few--even the wives and children seemed as happy with that at least as happy as a "normal"marriage
It seems almost ok to have a mistress but not more than one wife.

Pop stars seemed to attract girls out for a one night stand with some one famous.
The girls knew exactly what they were getting into.

Society seems to favour men sowing their wild oats--women condemned as ****s.
That really is a paradox.

Chris

[Pam]

your text is, to me it seems, a dreamed of text, not ever near the reality.

Even in old times, men who where men, following your definition, were a very tiny tiny minority, mostly from the higher class, which had money and food.

the staving masses or those who had to work hard never had the time and energy left to be that feminine or masculine. They were just surviving with quite primitive means.

To better describe:

Men were working hard in the woods or hunting. If they were not, their family would starve, which many many family did because their men would be sleazy or drunk bas..., those wifes would have to work double for their children.

Women had no time for anything else than cooking and washing and being pregnant therefore taking care of a trolley of children, if not dying during delivery of one of them (30% of women would die giving birth). Believe me, after a few years of this, forget the 'feminine' look or attitude (which is a cultural concept anyhow, at least the way you describe it).

In most untouched societies, women still pair together for survival and help each other, not having that much from their men anyhow.

To me, after many years on this planet, I perceive us, humans, as in the same mammal make up as other mammals, like lions, where the female does most of the work (hunting for lions) and the male rest and sleep.

All todays stats says the same: women make 30% less than men on average, and work twice as hard in the workforce, which in fact makes a 70% differential. It was also that way in the old time. I have seen it my whole life. Very few woman really have the steady support of their male, independently of the culture, civilisation, or Rockerfellers of this world - the latter only utilised a pre-existing make up.


Maybe what you have said is true in your experience, but mine doesn't bear out what you are saying in the least. How do you know women work twice as hard in the workplace? How would anyone know?I certainly have not seen this to be true and I am a woman. Your 30% less salary stat is bogus, at least in the US. It is very easy to manipulate statistics. There are distinct differences between the genders. You have described some of them in your post. Who was it that was out hunting food? Males. Why not the females if they are so hard working? Because they were the ones that had the kids, and nurtured them. Women do not have the strength, nor the aggressive tendencies that men can muster to hunt, generally speaking.

Your vast generalization the very few women have the steady support of their male, does the male have the steady support of the female, or have you even considered this?

Undoubtedly, their are many differences between males and females, which should be accepted. This ridiculous idea that women can copy and better everything a male does is really a form of adulation, although I'm sure most women wouldn't see it that way. One of our biggest deficits as women is that we are strongly driven by emotions, which can sometimes cause us to make decisions based strictly on the moments emotion rather than objectively analyzing a situation and tempering that with emotional input. Women seem to be far more fluid in their way of doing things and men are more linear in their task performing. Women are more prone to drama and men far less so(although that could be changing). Of course, there are always exceptions.

Oh, for god sake. You are asking me where I got the idea women work twice as hard, contesting it, you tell me that stats can be manipulated, and then you go on a spree of insubstatiated women behavior as being prone to drama, emotional, yourself generalising quite a lot while acusing me of doing it. etc etc.

It may be your behavior, but certainly not the behavior of the thousands of women and men I met in my life, clerks, secretaries, managers, and a quite a few high level professionals.

This is where I observed the quantities of work of females versus males collegues (not all males, but a good 60% same work load more pay or less work load more Pay).. at their workplace. and I know about every profession salaries in Canada as well as the split between women and men.

I did not need stats because I observed it, but the stats confirm my observations. Good.

Why don’t you do your own research before writing and trying to demolish someone’s else writings based on facts.

Women do not need this attitude from a peer towards their own gender, and men do not need that either, it does not help either gender.

Facing reality is much more helping for both sexes


I believe that women do need this attitude from a peer. The attitude is about balance and respect for all, acknowledging differences and accepting them.

[greybeard]

your text is, to me it seems, a dreamed of text, not ever near the reality.

Even in old times, men who where men, following your definition, were a very tiny tiny minority, mostly from the higher class, which had money and food.

the staving masses or those who had to work hard never had the time and energy left to be that feminine or masculine. They were just surviving with quite primitive means.

To better describe:

Men were working hard in the woods or hunting. If they were not, their family would starve, which many many family did because their men would be sleazy or drunk bas..., those wifes would have to work double for their children.

Women had no time for anything else than cooking and washing and being pregnant therefore taking care of a trolley of children, if not dying during delivery of one of them (30% of women would die giving birth). Believe me, after a few years of this, forget the 'feminine' look or attitude (which is a cultural concept anyhow, at least the way you describe it).

In most untouched societies, women still pair together for survival and help each other, not having that much from their men anyhow.

To me, after many years on this planet, I perceive us, humans, as in the same mammal make up as other mammals, like lions, where the female does most of the work (hunting for lions) and the male rest and sleep.

All todays stats says the same: women make 30% less than men on average, and work twice as hard in the workforce, which in fact makes a 70% differential. It was also that way in the old time. I have seen it my whole life. Very few woman really have the steady support of their male, independently of the culture, civilisation, or Rockerfellers of this world - the latter only utilised a pre-existing make up.


Maybe what you have said is true in your experience, but mine doesn't bear out what you are saying in the least. How do you know women work twice as hard in the workplace? How would anyone know?I certainly have not seen this to be true and I am a woman. Your 30% less salary stat is bogus, at least in the US. It is very easy to manipulate statistics. There are distinct differences between the genders. You have described some of them in your post. Who was it that was out hunting food? Males. Why not the females if they are so hard working? Because they were the ones that had the kids, and nurtured them. Women do not have the strength, nor the aggressive tendencies that men can muster to hunt, generally speaking.

Your vast generalization the very few women have the steady support of their male, does the male have the steady support of the female, or have you even considered this?

Undoubtedly, their are many differences between males and females, which should be accepted. This ridiculous idea that women can copy and better everything a male does is really a form of adulation, although I'm sure most women wouldn't see it that way. One of our biggest deficits as women is that we are strongly driven by emotions, which can sometimes cause us to make decisions based strictly on the moments emotion rather than objectively analyzing a situation and tempering that with emotional input. Women seem to be far more fluid in their way of doing things and men are more linear in their task performing. Women are more prone to drama and men far less so(although that could be changing). Of course, there are always exceptions.

Oh, for god sake. You are asking me where I got the idea women work twice as hard, contesting it, you tell me that stats can be manipulated, and then you go on a spree of insubstatiated women behavior as being prone to drama, emotional, yourself generalising quite a lot while acusing me of doing it. etc etc.

It may be your behavior, but certainly not the behavior of the thousands of women and men I met in my life, clerks, secretaries, managers, and a quite a few high level professionals.

This is where I observed the quantities of work of females versus males collegues (not all males, but a good 60% same work load more pay or less work load more Pay).. at their workplace. and I know about every profession salaries in Canada as well as the split between women and men.

I did not need stats because I observed it, but the stats confirm my observations. Good.

Why don’t you do your own research before writing and trying to demolish someone’s else writings based on facts.

Women do not need this attitude from a peer towards their own gender, and men do not need that either, it does not help either gender.

Facing reality is much more helping for both sexes


I believe that women do need this attitude from a peer. The attitude is about balance and respect for all, acknowledging differences and accepting them.

What more can be said peterpam
I would say that men do need to hear this too.

Chris

[greybeard]

Whilst it might seem im voicing opinions--that's not really so.
Just trying to spark conversation on this subject
Fortunately I can see from all different perspectives.
Bottom line is that people are different and whatever works for a female a male or a couple is right for them.

Be happy.

Chris

[A Voice from the Mountains]

…and then there’s the woman that’s understated in a plain old cotton t-shirt; her confidence, her femininity, her sensuality radiates from the inside out.

♡

I knew that post would ruffle some feathers, but frankly, if the woman radiates femininity, I think she still looks better in a dress. :P

More power to those in basketball shorts. Tomboys just aren't my thing. To each his own, but men are more alike in their taste than many like to admit, whether we realize it consciously or not.

There is something mesmerizing about a dainty, submissive, feminine woman, just as sociology studies show that women are more naturally attracted to strong, assertive, masculine men. Some women are turned on by pencil-necked geeks, and that's fine too. I'm not judging. Like I said, to each his own.


I found this documentary a while ago and found it interesting. It seems there's a lot of black men in the US who are taken by Brazilian women as well.

IA-8h1Y14xI

[greybeard]

…and then there’s the woman that’s understated in a plain old cotton t-shirt; her confidence, her femininity, her sensuality radiates from the inside out.

♡

I knew that post would ruffle some feathers, but frankly, if the woman radiates femininity, I think she still looks better in a dress. :P

More power to those in basketball shorts. Tomboys just aren't my thing. To each his own, but men are more alike in their taste than many like to admit, whether we realize it consciously or not.

Something Ive noticed over the years.
Woman’s shape has changed --perhaps to suit male preferences. No doubt men's shape has also changed.
Evolution--subconscious--Who knows.
Im not talking about going to the gym or any other fitness regime to achieve a different shape.

Chris

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Yeah, back when child-bearing was still considered a social duty, and people were considered oddballs if they didn't want to raise a family, curvy women with "child-bearing hips" seem to have been more desirable. Just look at the WW2-era pin-up posters. They weren't skinny women.

Sometime around the 1960's you had really skinny women come into fashion one way or another. I don't know how much of this was "natural" and how much was pushed, but I suspect it was more artificially pushed on society by the usual suspects. Remember Twiggy?

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-2t2su-YyNyM/UHrBEr6F_2I/AAAAAAAAXWk/gX_RMHpAZNE/s1600/twiggy-measurements.jpg

Mass media has done a lot to screw with the natural balance of male and female energies.

I think what mass media and social activism have done to the psychology of men and women has had a far more destructive impact than the changing norms in which body types are pushed as attractive, though.

By the way, Bernays explained this propaganda technique of spotlighting or highlighting (I forget the exact term), which was used to try to make anorexically-thin women appear attractive in the first place. It's all in how something is presented. Whether someone actually wants something or not, if you present it in the right way, and make them think everyone wants it, it'll eventually begin to change the way people think. Classic propaganda. Third wave feminism uses the same techniques to promote women who act like men.

[greybeard]

Agreed!!!
Ch

[Pam]

…and then there’s the woman that’s understated in a plain old cotton t-shirt; her confidence, her femininity, her sensuality radiates from the inside out.

♡

I knew that post would ruffle some feathers, but frankly, if the woman radiates femininity, I think she still looks better in a dress. :P

More power to those in basketball shorts. Tomboys just aren't my thing. To each his own, but men are more alike in their taste than many like to admit, whether we realize it consciously or not.

There is something mesmerizing about a dainty, submissive, feminine woman, just as sociology studies show that women are more naturally attracted to strong, assertive, masculine men. Some women are turned on by pencil-necked geeks, and that's fine too. I'm not judging. Like I said, to each his own.


I found this documentary a while ago and found it interesting. It seems there's a lot of black men in the US who are taken by Brazilian women as well.

IA-8h1Y14xI


Thank you for having the courage to post what you truly feel. There is too much self censorship going on these days. You have a right to feel the way you do.

[Pam]

…and then there’s the woman that’s understated in a plain old cotton t-shirt; her confidence, her femininity, her sensuality radiates from the inside out.

♡

I knew that post would ruffle some feathers, but frankly, if the woman radiates femininity, I think she still looks better in a dress. :P

More power to those in basketball shorts. Tomboys just aren't my thing. To each his own, but men are more alike in their taste than many like to admit, whether we realize it consciously or not.

Something Ive noticed over the years.
Woman’s shape has changed --perhaps to suit male preferences. No doubt men's shape has also changed.
Evolution--subconscious--Who knows.
Im not talking about going to the gym or any other fitness regime to achieve a different shape.

Chris

That is something I have wondered about. I know quite a few women that claim distaste for men, yet they are most definitely promoting their sexuality, some of them with a lot of effort. These women are not gay, so why all the effort and sometimes discomfort? I don't claim to have the answer to this but it definitely makes me curious.

[greybeard]

Some psychologists say that women dress for other women---
Certainly women tend to remember what other women wore at a function.
Men don't have a clue. Laughing.
I get the impression that some women are very much in competition with other women--as far as dress goes.
Men I think are more in competition in a physical way--ie what they do --their status etc.
Were back to males and females being different.
When you get a woman who is the "power behind the throne" then that couple tend to be successful as a unit and more often than not happy together.

Chris.

[Hazelfern]

As someone already expressed, you are entitled to the way that you feel. It seems to me you miss the fine ol days of yesteryear.
Me too! I want my mommy.

I just started reading the Bible and came across this: men are from earth and women
are from heaven; woman was originally brought forth from man’s longings and then
solidified with his blood. With that, women are held to a higher order and men are held to
the sole purpose of protecting women so they may stay holy. What do you think? Have we
both failed? Seems to me the protectors have left for higher ground. Therefore, woman
has been called into service to make up for the lack of man.
These are not perceived needs, but actual needs. The family has failed.

I live in basketball shorts and t’s.

It was never good fun when a ‘wolf whistle’ came my way. You try it some time.
Followed by relentless begging for sex and demoralizing language. Truly, not fun.

[Valerie Villars]

I've noticed women's shapes changing too. When I was in high school a girl with big breasts was an anomaly. This one girl had D sized breasts and she always got asked out. The rest of us, for the most part, had normal sized breasts.

I have noticed that fake breasts aside, many young women are much more curvy than we were and I think it's all the hormones in the food.

But, the amount of plastic surgery is astounding, at least here in America and you just don't know what anyone was born with anymore. I mean they have men getting chest and calf implants and girls getting lipo, butt implants, breast implants. It's insane the attention paid to impossible standards for normal people.

I am, for the first time in my life, in a more traditional relationship where the guy works and I don't and after a lifetime of being stressed out, I'm happy. When there is real care and a marriage of common ideals, it works beautifully. He's very male and I am just me.

Great thread for discussion Chris.

[A Voice from the Mountains]

…And then there’s the woman that's athletically inclined whose wardrobe is tasteful and creative. She’s open to experiment with anything from dresses to Boho-chic to Bohemian style to jeans and tee shirt. She has no need to follow the dictates of others rather she’s unlimited in her choice of expression.

♡

And perhaps also dye her hair purple and green. ;)

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Seems to me the protectors have left for higher ground. Therefore, woman
has been called into service to make up for the lack of man.
These are not perceived needs, but actual needs. The family has failed.

I don't think it's too hard to figure all of this out. Let's not miss the forest for the trees.

What were the big social movements that contributed to all of this profound change in gender relations, even the very concept of gender identity, over the past few decades?

- Third wave feminism (ie voting rights aren't enough; men and women must be indistinguishable in all metrics)
- The "sexual revolution"/"sexual liberation" (monogamy is oppression; we'll sleep with everyone if we feel like it!)
- The normalization and social promotion of homosexuality
- Promotion and adoption of homosexual couples adopting children (what difference could it make if a kid just has two moms or two dads? -- studies show a lot)
- Normalization of people mutilating their own genitals because they feel they were "born in the wrong body" (about half of them later regretting it and attempting suicide, which is an enormous rate of suicide indicative of mental illness)
- Normalization of sexualizing children and promoting the idea of "romantic" relationships between adults and children

It might be uncomfortable for people to realize that every single one of these progressive social movements was promoted by the exact same ideologues, namely a certain sect of subversives dating back to the Cold War.

Take a look at the street rioters today and it's not hard to find the hammer and sickle flying unabashedly right alongside the feminists and the LGBTQASDFSDFJKSJD++ crowd.

http://www.signalfire.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/4.jpg

https://www.henrymakow.com/upload_images/class-struggle.jpg

http://ahabonn.blogsport.de/images/20130322_180501_20130322193510319.jpg

https://archive.4plebs.org/dl/pol/image/1504/03/1504037191805.png

They aren't being called "Pantifa" for nothing. Many of their "shock troops" literally wear panties. Any ladies here turned on by this development? I doubt it.

https://i.redd.it/c2gqh0kxllhz.jpg


If anyone really wants to know why we no longer live in a society where 'men and men and women are feminine', the entire story is right there. It's cultural subversion and psychological warfare that has been waged for decades through the media and leftist universities.

The hippies in the 1960's still thought of themselves as patriotic Americans, as misguided as they may have been about that. They wanted peace with the communists (ie passive allowance of tyrannical communist expansion worldwide), but most hippies in the 60's still didn't consider themselves Marxists.

Remember the Beatles? "If you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao, you ain't gonna make it with anyone anyhow." Well times have changed. They're comfortable enough now to go ahead and throw all their eggs openly into the same basket.

(A close friend of John Lennon's said he was a closet supporter of Reagan before he was shot and killed -- the same year that Reagan himself was shot in an assassination attempt.)


It was never good fun when a ‘wolf whistle’ came my way. You try it some time.
Followed by relentless begging for sex and demoralizing language. Truly, not fun.

Chivalrous men were well on their way to becoming extinct about the same time that women began voluntarily engaging in all the sorts of activities that men once sought to shield them from. I told a story above about my great-grandfather punching a man into the river simply for cussing in front of a woman. Not at her, but just in front of her. How do you think catcalls would have been handled back then? It would not have been tolerated.

Nowadays, women are just as likely to get punched in the face themselves. I think it's disgraceful, but I'm not the one saying that women and men are indistinguishable and equal in all ways. The radicals who truly believe that should be happy that women are getting into fights no differently than if they were built like men. That's just the beginning of true equality, in fact. Next stop: the draft.

Ever seen a 130-pound woman try to drag a grievously-wounded 200 pound man off the battlefield while under fire? I've heard stories, and they weren't pretty. But maybe you should start getting your daughters/granddaughters prepared for it now, so they'll be ready when progress comes knocking.

Reconsider what I'm showing above. The cultural subversives use feminism as their chosen vessel of disruption. Not the behavior of men. All of this is a chain reaction that began with radical feminism. And it was international communists pushing this from the beginning.

The Soviets paid for all of this stuff to be promoted here, exploiting our rights as Americans to freedom of expression, but they didn't put up with it in their own country. Just like Israel promotes open borders and homosexuality/transvestitism in all countries today, except for their own. "For thee but not for me!"

What has been done to gender roles in our society is a form of social subversion and warfare.

[greybeard]

Your post is profound A Voice from the Mountains
Thank you for taking the trouble to put it together and post.

Chris

[greybeard]

I think its important that people say what they think on this subject, as has happened on this thread,

I dont mind anyone disagreeing with anything I post as I am aware that I am not my thoughts--if that makes sense.
Its not taken personally when people disagree.

I am happy that this thread has brought quite a few posts of differing perspective.
Please keep them coming.
For myself, I like to see women dressed in skirts but I appreciate that other modes of dress are perhaps more practical.
Its got nothing to do with sexuality--just pleasing to the eye.

Chris

[greybeard]

looks like we are done on this interesting subject.
Any more for any more?
Thanks for all contributions.

Chris

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Well I posted this video on the thread about masculinity but since this thread is about men and women, and I just went on a rant about feminism, I might as well criticize modern men too while I'm at it:

mduUbJTdXag


Some "men" working at Buzzfeed measure their testosterone levels and find they're below the average for 85 to 100 year old men:

FTSvLKY7HEk


kEXBEAbO4Fs

[greybeard]

A Voice from the Mountains---Good that's valid and fair minded.
I suspect that one way or another its been orchestrated.
Laptops signal another danger to sperm count. ( a cousin of micro wave I think)

Chris

[KiwiElf]

I like those days, Chris ;) :thumbsup:

[greybeard]

I like those days, Chris ;) :thumbsup:

Agree.
My wife is a feminist and objected to me putting her name with mine on a reply to my sister by @
I should have consulted her first before putting her name on a non controversial very brief response mainly about a parcel sent.
I sent her a copy for info.

If I got brave I would have asked her to have a reality check.

I dont mind--keeps reducing my male ego laughing
That's why she is in my life.

Ch

¤=[Post Update]=¤

Once upon a time men and women knew exactly where they stood and what was acceptable to each.

Chris

[petra]

I have noticed that fake breasts aside, many young women are much more curvy than we were and I think it's all the hormones in the food.


I think you're absolutely right, and I've suspected the same thing for quite some time. The kids are like giants to me sometimes an it almost makes me laugh. I can actually live off of Kids Meals, because to me, it's a normal-size-person meal :)



But, the amount of plastic surgery is astounding, at least here in America and you just don't know what anyone was born with anymore. I mean they have men getting chest and calf implants and girls getting lipo, butt implants, breast implants. It's insane the attention paid to impossible standards for normal people.


It's freaking me out too. Recently I read a girl say that she simply could not leave the house without her fake lashes, and my mind was just blown. Also I wonder how many people have died over the course of time due to high heels. Surely those were not invented by woman! :P :)


Some psychologists say that women dress for other women---
Certainly women tend to remember what other women wore at a function.
Men don't have a clue. Laughing.
I get the impression that some women are very much in competition with other women--as far as dress goes.
Men I think are more in competition in a physical way--ie what they do --their status etc.
Were back to males and females being different.
When you get a woman who is the "power behind the throne" then that couple tend to be successful as a unit and more often than not happy together.


Well that's food for thought. I don't care about my clothes any more... but I remember when I did care! I was trying to "fit in" with my crowd - but it wasn't a competition. Looking back now it's embarrassing to think about. We must have looked like a bunch of clones... :facepalm:

In my family my mother took care of everything, except for making money, which was father's job. It worked really well, for them.

I must take after my dad, because I'd rather be the power behind the power behind the throne... if you get my drift :) I could lead I guess - I think I'd be a good leader - I'd just rather not :)

[greybeard]

Another perspective yet again and to be very clear its not mine.

When I was fourteen I had a female friend who was eighteen or there about.
She really was a looker and some one put rumours about that she was a "sex worker"

She said to me " Marriage is just legalized prostitution"

That's from a young female way back then.

Sad!!!

Chris

[Pam]

Ever seen a 130-pound woman try to drag a grievously-wounded 200 pound man off the battlefield while under fire? I've heard stories, and they weren't pretty. But maybe you should start getting your daughters/granddaughters prepared for it now, so they'll be ready when progress comes knocking.

When I used to work for the Sheriff's office as a dispatcher, I remember that many of the female cops would do strenuous workouts to build strength. Even with all that diligence, they didn't compare with the average man in strength. They were definitely stronger than the average woman and I admired the commitment. I know there are some rare exceptions of women who devote their entire lives to build strength but day to day, women don't compare.

[Ba-ba-Ra]

My experience has only been in my country, but it seems to me that competition in women has become stronger through the years.

Rather than a sisterhood and a support group, who shared in coffee clatches and sewing circles; we've gone to competing in the job market, not just with each other, but with men.

Then there are the many TV shows called: The Housewifes of (you fill in the blank) that seem to glamorize women fighting and competing.

[hermit]

First big step back into the pond. Long one. You've been warned. ;)

I want to begin by saying I'm not actively attempting to offend here, but point out something that I'm seeing in this thread that hasn't been addressed that needs to maybe be considered.

What if, to begin with, we're working from a premise that's not being examined fully? A premise that in fact isn't as wonderful as it may seem?

Greybeard, would your experiences have been the same if you had been black man in South Africa in the same time period? Or a gay man in Great Britain?

I'm trying to point out that the experience you're sharing here is limited by certain confines that we're all subject to. So for an example, I as a queer man can't possibly know what it's like to be a heterosexual woman. I can try! But that challenge forces me into an uncomfortable position in which I have to attempt to cross the road.

Crossing the road is an idea I came across when I was studying Franciscan Theology as part of my postulancy. It starts with the story of Francis, a young man in the middle ages, attempting to put himself closer in touch with the divine by living the principles of his faith. Unfortunately for him, this meant coming to terms with the reality that our labels, our ideas about categories of people, how we define individuals, while holding value personally can often put us in spaces that are comfortably spaced to prevent from significantly interacting, or understanding the other's point of view.

In Francis' case, this meant lepers. Lepers in Francis' day were the untouchables not because of anything that was done, but because a disease took hold and or the safety of the community they had to isolate themselves. People who weren't lepers convinced themselves that it was because of some sin that God deemed them to be condemned to live like this.

But Francis wanted to approach it differently. He wanted to move beyond the labels and ideals to see what was really happening here--namely, that in truth he was the leper and the leper was him.

In this case, I'm going to suggest that because the original premise was made from a point of view that was limited, and although it may still have value, it doesn't include the idea that there may be other ways of perceiving what that time period was like.

And as difficult as it may be, I think the responsible thing here is to consider how to expand the perception to include other ideas that, while maybe uncomfortable, may hold some value if they're looked at without fear.

As a caveat, I'm going to also say that I believe with almost 100% certainty that those who want to manipulate a society for their own ends will take advantage of the road existing. That doesn't, however, give an excuse for not at least attempting to broaden our understanding beyond the binary.

At the very least--what if the binary understanding of gender and sexuality is wrong?

Just because an idea is uncomfortable to embrace doesn't mean it's false. But, that fear is motivating a lot of people to act out of fear rather than taking the time to breath and consider.

I feel like I may have just plopped ideas out here, and maybe need to tighten and focus them through subsequent posts. For those of you in this thread, is anything I'm saying resonating?

Hermit (aka the artist formerly known as Milneman)

[greybeard]

thank you very much for your post Hermit
Certainly my experience would have been different in the situations you mention, though I have experienced prejudice against me for various reasons.
One of the reasons for starting this thread was that I wanted to get the different viewpoints discussed. No point in debate if everyone has the same opinion.
Chris

Ps Im married to a black lady from Cameroon and of course her viewpoint differs from mine as you would expect.
It might be interesting to check the link on my signature.

[hermit]

That's beautifully put. And exactly the point I may have not made so well. It's the prejudice you've experienced that is the gift you have received, the gift you then use to develop the empathy needed in crossing the road.


Take the emotions, the feelings, the experience of the discrimination, and use that to empathize with the individual you're seeing. The individual you're confronted with that challenges the ideas you're safe with. That's what crossing the road is.


We're not limited by our experiences! Rather, our experiences are what challenge us to expand our thoughts and ideas, and maybe see that we've been limited by ideas we've held.

But how wonderful...how much time we have to try something new. That's a gift as well. :)

[greybeard]

Yes you gain "spiritual" muscle from the weights you lift.

My dad said to me after I had nearly died from a burst spleen.
"Reflect on upon your past misfortunes of which you have had a few but your current blessings of which there are many..

His life at home was so bad that he ran away to join the Navy at the age of 15 and found himself on board ship at The Battle of Jutland--Ships being blown up many being killed--No doubt a horrendous experience.

His father was an alcoholic--his mum tried to commit suicide.

So I did not come from an upper class family--but dad was a gentleman and treated all with respect.

Chris

[A Voice from the Mountains]

And as difficult as it may be, I think the responsible thing here is to consider how to expand the perception to include other ideas that, while maybe uncomfortable, may hold some value if they're looked at without fear.

As a caveat, I'm going to also say that I believe with almost 100% certainty that those who want to manipulate a society for their own ends will take advantage of the road existing. That doesn't, however, give an excuse for not at least attempting to broaden our understanding beyond the binary.

At the very least--what if the binary understanding of gender and sexuality is wrong?

I agree that it's necessary to consider uncomfortable truths in order to move forward. But that goes both ways, and applies to homosexuals as well.

As far as what you choose to do in private, with a consenting adult, I don't care. You guys can do whatever. You're free, and I'm rather libertarian in that regard, so have at it.

BUT....

Where do you stand when it comes to introducing little children to this stuff? Because that's what's going on today.

https://s8.postimg.cc/vovkwjfud/IMG_3671.jpg

Would you agree that children are very susceptible to being influenced by adults?

I think it's rather obvious that children are very easily pushed into things by adults, and in this case people are not just teaching kids to be tolerant of others, but actively pushing the idea onto them that homosexuality is a positive good and that they can even be gay before they've even gone through puberty.

Puberty is when children physically transition into adults, by having their reproductive system become active, with all of the hormones kicking in and everything else involved. Prior to that, why the need to press this stuff onto kids? They are admittedly psychologically ambiguous in terms of gender roles, simply because they don't have much estrogen or testosterone pumping through their bodies yet -- because they haven't matured into adults.

And people can't streak around half naked in public, doing all sorts of obscene things in these pride parades, without little kids being exposed to it. That's what it means to be doing this stuff in public. I don't see any need for it whatsoever.


On the subject of whether or not gender is truly a binary phenomenon, that's something that academics can investigate in an unbiased manner. Psychologists, anthropologists, physicians, etc., could all have some input on that.

For me, there are two things: biological gender, and someone's personal psychology. There are only 2 biological genders. Male and female. Put them together and they make babies. That's how mammals reproduce. We are not purely spiritual beings. We have physical bodies and there are consequences to that.

When you go outside of that physical reproductive system, you're no longer talking strictly biology, but human psychology and sociology. And though different institutions push different literature, there are in fact credible studies that show that social conditioning has a profound impact on sexual orientation and people are not simply "born that way." This is obvious enough from the fact that one third of Generation Z identifies as non-heterosexual (https://www.thetrumpet.com/17473-one-third-of-generation-z-not-heterosexual) according to an Ipsos study. That is a rate so far above and beyond previous generations' rate of non-heterosexuality, that it is obviously correlated to all of the "gay pride" stuff that's been pushing on kids in recent years. And that, in turn, proves that this is not simply a biological "born that way" phenomenon, which scientists have known for sure at least since the 1970's.

So to sum up, there are three things from me:

I don't care what consenting adults do in private.
Homosexuality is nonetheless heavily dependent upon social conditioning and is not a biological function.
We shouldn't be pushing these ideas onto kids before they've even gone through puberty.

The vast majority of men are straight just like the vast majority of men have eyesight and can hear, and all of these things are for very practical biological reasons, to help our species survive. I don't see any reason why there should be a need to be promoting anything deviates from the natural biological norm in general, let alone to kids.

What it really boils down to is emasculating our society and contributing to depopulation, and destruction of the nuclear family (the nuclear family being a bastardization of the extended family networks most people once enjoyed).

[greybeard]

There are so many shades of grey in gender.
I believe that people are born the way they are--there is no choice in this.

Children with straight parents turn out "otherwise"
Children from other relationships dont follow what they have grown up with necessarily.

As said its a private matter.

Chris

[greybeard]

If Im promoting anything it would fall under the banner of "Respect"
Any relationship is like a living entity --it has to be nourished for it to survive.

Seems people are more hung up on differences than similarities.
If I needed a blood transfusion im not going to worry too much about the "details" of the donor---am I ?
That might be an inconvenient truth.
While the thread is at its root about masculinity and femininity and falsely created differences --extremes--as said there are may dgrees of feminity and masculinity.
Al that can be said is the body is male or female and even then there can be variety.

I try to be true to my nature with all the conflicting thoughts therein.
"Management of part"s is a good NLP book--every thought --idea brings up its opposite--"What if?"

All very interesting

Chris

[Pam]

That's beautifully put. And exactly the point I may have not made so well. It's the prejudice you've experienced that is the gift you have received, the gift you then use to develop the empathy needed in crossing the road.


Take the emotions, the feelings, the experience of the discrimination, and use that to empathize with the individual you're seeing. The individual you're confronted with that challenges the ideas you're safe with. That's what crossing the road is.


We're not limited by our experiences! Rather, our experiences are what challenge us to expand our thoughts and ideas, and maybe see that we've been limited by ideas we've held.

But how wonderful...how much time we have to try something new. That's a gift as well. :)


I think everyone has experienced injustice and challenges of some sort, even those that appear to have a easy, prosperous existence. In fact the beautiful people living in gilded cages may have been given the greatest challenges to overcome, whether they see it or not. These challenges are not limited to those that experience discrimination. Nobody gets it like they want it to be.

[Ba-ba-Ra]

Where do you stand when it comes to introducing little children to this stuff? Because that's what's going on today.




Recently, in Sacramento, California parents became aware that in a public 4th grade schoolroom, the teacher was telling children: That just because you were born a girl or boy, doesn't mean you have to remain that sex - you have choice.

When parents found out there were many objections. Should 8 and 9 year olds be introduced to such a concept and should it be taught in school.

Not in my world. I don't know what the outcome was of the above situation as it wasn't further reported on the local news. I do know many of the parents pulled there child out of that school.

But, is this where we are going . . .and why? A person can now join our armed services and then, if they decide to change their sex identification, the military pays for it.

I recently saw an item where scientists can change the sex of a mouse in laboratories - why are we even attempting these type of experiments. (couldn't find that article, but then there is this one.)


https://www.real.video/5823431329001 chemicals in the water changing male fish into females.

Greybeard, I do agree with your respect aspect and talked about it in my original post.. . .respect is an extremely important aspect of a civilized society, however, where do we, and should we, draw a line with this concept of unisex . . . or chose your own sex?!?

[Hazelfern]

So to sum up:

Homosexuality is nonetheless heavily dependent upon social conditioning and is not a biological function.


You strike me as smart enough to not actually believe that.

Your thread took on a life of its own Chris! Let’s offend the already offended and downtrodden.
Pot stirring is good fun. That’s all I am going to say about that.

If my house is on fire I want a man to pull me from danger. A woman would not be capable without hurting herself in the process.

Respect, decency and common sense.

Sorry for the disjointed thought process. In my case it is age related but hey - that's for another thread which I am sure has been covered! G'Day all!!

[greybeard]

The grass on the other side is always greener--as in "I would be happy if my body reflected my sexual orientation"--however some who made the change regretted it.
You have raised another difficult question Ba-ba-Ra "however, where do we, and should we, draw a line with this concept of unisex . . . or chose your own sex?!?
I would not be happy with that school and would exercise my choice by withdrawing a child I had there.
I can draw my own line but not for others. The moment something is suppressed it grows in strength.
However there is a time and place for every thing and I dont think teachers should bring up that particular subject to young children.

Chris

[Pam]

The grass on the other side is always greener--as in "I would be happy if my body reflected my sexual orientation"--however some who made the change regretted it.
You have raised another difficult question Ba-ba-Ra "however, where do we, and should we, draw a line with this concept of unisex . . . or chose your own sex?!?
I would not be happy with that school and would exercise my choice by withdrawing a child I had there.
I can draw my own line but not for others. The moment something is suppressed it grows in strength.
However there is a time and place for every thing and I dont think teachers should bring up that particular subject to young children.

Chris

I believe that there are a number of youth that go through the state of rebellion and discontent. In the past they might have been Goth, punk, hippies, or beatnicks or whatever. . Most did not maintain those identities throughout life, and most probably didn't find the inner satisfaction they were seeking. Promoting or allowing young people to make these permanent changes is ludicrous. Check out Youtube alone for the videos of people that have regretted transition surgeries. I am not saying everyone does, but you better make dang sure that is what you want before you do it. Certainly, no one should be influencing young people to take that stand. I have heard of children being given hormones before puberty, to me that is insanity.

[hermit]

Definitely needing to think this one through and come up with an appropriate response, but for the mean time:

Consider this: Let's take the gender and sexually diverse cards off the table, and pull that spectrum of thoughts and ideas out of the discussion. Because really, it's not necessary for this discussion to unfold, or for me to express my point.

And, I think in the scheme of things, I only mentioned it twice? (still on my first cup of coffee)

Would it be a fair thing to suggest that a caucasian male and a caucasian female, in 1950 and 2018, are experiencing life and expressing masculine and feminine rolls in different ways than people who live in visible minorities, then and now?

Because what I'm seeing here is fear. Not an academic response, but a frightened response.

So, why does questioning the ideas of masculine and feminine cause fear responses in people?

Is there not both masculine and feminine qualities in every human being?

Is a quality masculine because it's exhibited by a biological male person? Can a biological male person exhibit qualities that are also considered feminine?

And, more importantly: what does binary thinking protect us from? Because, I believe, if an individual is confident in their masculinity, or their femininity, they won't be worrying about how they express.

This is fear. Reacting on fear is not reacting from sanity.

Off to corrupt the youth--I'm giving a talk at a university...wish I could continue...NEED to continue later.

Pax et Bonum

hermit

[pabranno]

Hermit,

How eloquent and thought-provoking your posts are!
I respect your courage and patience.
Most importantly, I appreciate the humane and compassionate spirit you reflect.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts.

Pamela

[AutumnW]

A Voice from the Mountains,

Conflating gayness with perversion and using examples and pics from the extreme edge is unfair. When people feel overpowered and disrespected they use the same tactics the first chance they get on YOU. I feel this is part of what lies at the heart of some of the cry bully behavior radiating from academia today.

I am gay in nearly every way, except my sexual orientation, so I do appreciate the fluid nature of gender though I don't insist on being called anything other than her or she -- but I also have nearly always been treated with respect. How about you? Has there been a time in your life when you weren't for some reason? How did it feel?

[greybeard]

This thread does have a life of its own and Im happy with that.
Its not my intention to confine it to the main subject--the only suggestion is keep it respectful.
Its very easy to misinterpret what is written.
80% of communication is nonverbal.

Chris

[greybeard]

Perversion has nothing to do with being heterosexual, lesbian or gay --these are natural orientation--born with.
Perversion is extreme and controlling.
Chris

[Pam]

Because what I'm seeing here is fear. Not an academic response, but a frightened response


This is fear. Reacting on fear is not reacting from sanity

Are you suggesting there is a lack of sanity in this thread?

I for one am very comfortable with my gender. I am a balanced androgynous person. I believe I coined the phrase, as it describes me perfectly. A person that has well balanced masculine and feminine tendencies finds that gender is not an issue. Although physically I am a female, I have no particular attraction to either gender. If I am attracted to someone, it is not based on their gender. I can enjoy sex if I choose to, which would only be with someone of either gender that I really care about, but I have no preoccupation with it and could easily do without. I have even taken a couple tests that are supposed to show you your level of feminine/ masculine traits and one time I scored a 50% and one a 51%. I take that with a grain of salt, but it backs up what I already know about myself. I do not talk about this with anyone because it is a non issue. I only bring it up because it is pertinent to the discussion. I feel very fortunate that I can appreciate both genders without a preoccupation with either. I suspect that I have far more comfort with gender than most of the population. I am able to have what I believe is a balance perspective about both. In fact, I have never really understood those that are preoccupied with it, there is so much more to life. I believe that the more a person is preoccupied with gender the more imbalanced they are regarding gender.That is strictly my personal observation and have no way to verify that.

My interest in this thread has nothing to do with fear. I am interested in the politics of gender as it is being used to manipulate a society. I believe this is a planned manipulation using the MSM, academia and social media to spread the propaganda of the virtues of victimhood and identity politics. I believe that most of those promoting the manipulation via these methods are as brainwashed as those they are brainwashing. I think they feel they are encouraging some sort of equality. I also believe the religion of political correctness is promoted to allow censorship through self censoring, a most clever strategy.

At the end of the day my concern about this manipulation is about the division it appears to be creating. I don't give a rip, personally about anyone's sexual preference or if they are mature, changing their gender. Traditional families are fine with me, any type of cohesive unit is fine with me, what I don't like is pitting one form of sexuality or one gender against another. I don't like blaming individuals based on gender and race for something that happened in the past. I'm kind of old fashioned, I believe in "live and let live".

[A Voice from the Mountains]

So to sum up:

Homosexuality is nonetheless heavily dependent upon social conditioning and is not a biological function.


You strike me as smart enough to not actually believe that.

Are you really incapable of considering that you could be wrong about this?

I understand that the MSM has been hammered studies that purport to show that this is an inborn trait, but if you really believe that, then why are so many Gen Z'ers identifying as non-straight? About 1/3 of them altogether. That's an enormously greater rate than previous generations. So if they are simply born that way, why are there all of a sudden a ton of them being born now? Can you give me a biological explanation for it?



Because what I'm seeing here is fear. Not an academic response, but a frightened response.

So, why does questioning the ideas of masculine and feminine cause fear responses in people?

Well let me ask you: why does pedophilia cause fear in parents?

Is it because the parents are simply bigots and small-minded? After all, do children not love their parents? So why can't they love other adults too?

Isn't it natural for children to love adults? Just as it's natural for people to be born in the wrong body and feel it necessary to have their genitals surgically removed?

So maybe pedophiliaphobes are bigots too and simply feel threatened because the world is progressing towards a brighter future, where children can have romantic relationships with adults and everyone accepts it and it's okay.

What's wrong with that argument?

[AutumnW]

Mountain,

Now you are conflating being transgender with pedophilia, while confusing the concept of love with sexual expression and orientation. That's what's wrong with that argument. I'm a big fan of Jordan Peterson--not a knee jerk politically correct individual. I like to understand how why and where ludicrous movements in academia get started. They don't arise out of thin air as nutty and Swiftian as they appear, at least to me.

The reason more kids are identifying as non-straight, might be because the in- utero environment for many of them may have changed. Sperm counts have dropped by a tremendous amount in young men, too. All kinds of unusual phenomena around gender is showing up in the wild as well. Frogs with extra gonads or none, etc...

So...apologies to Hermit (and Kermit:confused:) for responding but feel you have to dial back your outrage a bit.

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Now you are conflating being transgender with pedophilia, while confusing the concept of love with sexual expression and orientation. That's what's wrong with that argument.

And perhaps people are also conflating the idea of biological gender with mental health issues. Most people here seem to be assuming that homosexuality is purely a biological function, but I've never seen any proof of that.

I personally believe that transvestites, for example, do in fact have mental disorders and need some form of therapy before they do something that they will regret for the rest of their lives. They often deeply regret surgically removing their genitals and have an almost 50% suicide rate. Again, these people need therapists, not surgeons. I'm not as much afraid of them as I feel sorry for their tragic situation.


The reason more kids are identifying as non-straight, might be because the in- utero environment for many of them may have changed. Sperm counts have dropped by a tremendous amount in young men, too. All kinds of unusual phenomena around gender is showing up in the wild as well. Frogs with extra gonads or none, etc...

I'm sure that's part of the equation too, the warfare on our endocrine system. But that is a result of polluting our bodies with toxins, and there is no "gay gene."

So why do you think those in power have "allowed" (actively promoted) this situation to develop into such an assault on our endocrine systems? Because they love us so much that they want us to experience the wonderful utopia of a world filled with 1/3 homosexuals? Does that sound like something they would do to improve the quality of life in Western civilization, as if that has anything at all to do with what they want for us?

More likely the youngest generation is simply going to be used as the stepping-stone to accepting presentations such as this:

Wn4ok_W-7d4


But when it comes to pedophilia specifically, do you think it's right for parents to be afraid of pedophiles? Or is their fear simply rooted in bigotry and misunderstanding? Really, I want you to think about this. Could fear possibly play any healthy role at all in protecting future generations from abusive behaviors such as this?

People are afraid of letting children play alone outside too, or play with snakes or wild animals. Is all fear automatically intolerant and irrational? Why do humans experience emotions such as concern and fear in the first place? Is there any biological need for it at all? Perhaps those who are afraid of murders, rapists, and terrorists are also problematic? Or where do we draw the line, and how can we justify it?


This is also worth considering:

https://wingright.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/statistics-on-parenting-gay_s640x607.jpg


Notice that the heterosexual rate children having sexual contact with adults is 2%, which is still alarmingly high if you ask me.

The same rate for lesbian parents is 23%.

Children are also forced into sex at a rate of over 3 times higher when raised by lesbian parents, and are less likely to marry when they grow up. They've also thought about suicide at more than double the heterosexual rate. Again, an elevated risk of suicide appears. And I don't buy the argument that it is simply because of bullying, because slaves endure the worst bullying of all and it doesn't make them commit suicide at such high rates. There is something else going on.

Statistics on domestic abuse and violence are also significantly higher in lesbian households, than heterosexual households.

This could also go back to the assault on the endocrine system, because people today often can't even handle certain social interactions, whereas our ancestors had to live daily with conditions that most of us would find intolerable today. A lot of our ability to deal with stress has to do with our hormones.

[AutumnW]

Transvestism is a kink, a paraphilia. I think you meant transgender. And that figure of 50% of surgically altered males regret their choice and commit suicide? Where are the peer reviewed studies on that?

I will refrain from commenting more as you seem to like to fight and I won't engage you.

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Transvestism is a kink, a paraphilia. I think you meant transgender.

I intentionally avoid the ever-changing name game of politically correct ideology.

The word "transgender" is based on the idea that people can be born into the "wrong" body, as if a mistake was made at birth.

Transvestites is really what they are, because it's really just men pretending to be women and vice-versa. And then sometimes unfortunately they decide to get surgery to mutilate their genitals. Without all of the flowery language of political correctness, this is really what we're talking about, and we may as well be frank about it.


And that figure of 50% of surgically altered males regret their choice and commit suicide? Where are the peer reviewed studies on that?

Once source very quickly found using a search engine. Here you go:


The Transgender Suicide Rate Isn’t Due To Discrimination

Chelsea Manning—who became a male-to-female transgender after going to prison as Bradley Manning for giving reams of classified information to WikiLeaks—allegedly attempted suicide earlier this week. Manning was taken to a prison hospital after an apparent attempted hanging.

This is not a surprise: “transgender” individuals have an alarmingly high suicide rate, somewhere north of 40 percent by some reliable estimates. A variety of explanations are often given for this astronomical figure, chief among them that transgender people are driven to kill themselves in such large numbers because they suffer from discrimination, bigotry and hatred.

Zack Ford of ThinkProgress blames the high suicide rate on “rejection, discrimination, violence, harassment, and the negative life circumstances that result from such treatment.” Last month the New England Journal of Medicine attributed to “substantial discrimination” a great many negative psychological conditions among transgender individuals, including a higher suicide rate.

The Comparatively Low Black Suicide Rate

There are two problems with this theory. The first is that it utterly ignores the most salient feature of transgender individuals: that they are mentally ill and need serious treatment. This is not a moral or ethical judgment. It is, rather, a fact. Individuals who believe they are a different sex than that of their biology are psychologically ill—self-evidently so—and one would quite reasonably expect a higher suicide rate from a portion of the population that suffers from so significant a mental illness (particularly a mental illness it is fashionable to indulge rather than treat).

The second problem is that the discrimination theory of suicide does not hold up when compared to other minority groups who suffer disproportionate real and perceived amounts of bigotry and negative discrimination. The Centers for Disease Control’s numbers on suicide indicate that the highest rates of suicide over the past 15 years or so belong to…white people. In contrast, in most of the years surveyed black people had the lowest suicide rate among all ethnicities. White suicide actually rose in the period 2000-2014.

If discrimination were truly a motivating factor for suicide, you would expect the black suicide rate to be a good deal higher than it is, if not higher outright than the white rate: blacks report overwhelmingly higher rates of perceived racial discrimination than whites, and it is reasonable to assume that actual instances of discrimination against blacks are a good deal higher than those against whites. Yet the suicide rate of the former remains stubbornly lower than that of the latter.

It’s the Mental Illness, Y’all

Why? Because discrimination is almost certainly a nondeterminate factor in general suicide rates. Mental illness, on the other hand, is very clearly a motivating factor in a great many suicides: the rate of successful suicide is extremely correlative with conditions of mental illness. Since transgenderism is a deleterious psychological affliction, it is wholly unsurprising to find higher rates of suicide among that class of people.

A sane society would be advocating for robust, ameliorative psychological therapy to steer transgender people away from their delusions. Instead, we indulge this sickness on an industrial scale, building television shows around the phenomenon and promoting it even unto the point of gross caricature.

Transgender individuals are precious, irreplaceable children of God. They deserve better than the cultural zeitgeist that has decided a sky-high suicide rate is an acceptable externality of modern-day progressive sexual ideology. Unfortunately, as Manning shows, the feel-good politics of liberals often takes precedence over the lives of the vulnerable.

http://thefederalist.com/2016/07/07/evidence-the-transgender-suicide-rate-isnt-due-to-discrimination/


Another source:


Suicide attempts are alarmingly common among transgender individuals such as Lampe; 41% try to kill themselves at some point in their lives, compared with 4.6% of the general public. The numbers come from a study by the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention and the Williams Institute, which analyzed results from the National Transgender Discrimination Survey. Researchers are preparing to launch another version of the online survey on Wednesday.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/08/16/transgender-individuals-face-high-rates--suicide-attempts/31626633/




I will refrain from commenting more as you seem to like to fight and I won't engage you.

No, no. I would never dare fight for anything, least of all the health and well-being of future generations. :facepalm:


President of the American College of Pediatricians Dr. Michelle Cretella on Transgenderism: A Mental Illness is Not a Civil Right

s57T27M1ZXk

[AutumnW]

This post was beside the point

[A Voice from the Mountains]

When we broke up he cried. He also cried when I made broccoli instead of mashed potatoes for dinner. He cried all the time and it wasn't a hushed manly cry but a wailing like a banshee, cat through a band saw type of cry. And yet...he was completely heterosexual. Nothing against guys who cry but that was so strange.

It fits everything we are discussing in this thread.

"When men were men & women were feminine"

As in, men aren't men anymore, and women aren't feminine anymore. Or at least that's the trend.

A trend which has emerged during the same period as an enormous amount of corruption and Matrix-like social control structures the likes of which the human race has never seen before. It's not a coincidence.


https://blogs-images.forbes.com/jonentine/files/2014/03/pesticide_spray_t-pmartins2.jpg

https://media.mercola.com/ImageServer/Public/2016/October/how-atrazine-became-pollutant-drinking-water-fb.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/43aZErx.jpg

[AutumnW]

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/political-minds/201705/the-american-college-pediatricians-is-anti-lgbt-group

Did you read this headline and think I was accusing The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) of opposing the LGBT community? That’s the problem. A small anti-LGBT group called the “American College of Pediatricians (ACP)” created a name that is easily confused with the AAP, the largest pediatrics organization in the country.

This group spearheaded by Dr. Cretella is a small splinter from the larger organization, 'American Academy of Pediatrics.' They left the larger organization, after the larger organization supported studies that concluded gay parents did not have a harmful impact on their children.

[AutumnW]

[QUOTE=AutumnW;1242850]When we broke up he cried. He also cried when I made broccoli instead of mashed potatoes for dinner. He cried all the time and it wasn't a hushed manly cry but a wailing like a banshee, cat through a band saw type of cry. And yet...he was completely heterosexual. Nothing against guys who cry but that was so strange.

It fits everything we are discussing in this thread.

"When men were men & women were feminine"

As in, men aren't men anymore, and women aren't feminine anymore. Or at least that's the trend.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Autumn says:

Voice, So cause for some compassion and deep respect for those who are wired differently. And really, who cares if some people opt for surgery. Nobody is hauling YOU into a cold antechamber and grabbing your nads, so relax already.:star: As far as telling little kids they can choose their gender, I don't know. Sex ed should probably come later, all of it. The birds, the bees, the frogs.

[greybeard]

I stick with gender--be it male, female or anything else is natural--its down to the balance of chromosomes.

There seems to be more gays now because its safer for them to come out --not suppress their sexuality.

Some have seriously tried to make traditional marriage work and eventually ended up with a same sex relationship.
There is homosexuality in the animal realm.

Im happily male yet I have a lot of feminine traits.
So in some circumstances the strong male comes out but in others the feminine trait is the main response.

I dont think anyone is 100% male, female or other.
Some Greek soldiers seemingly had young male to see to their needs, in return they were taught to be soldiers.
Homosexuality has been a fact since the dawn of time.

Regardless all these different "lifestyles" are there--they exist--no point in trying to change that.

As a parallel im a sober alcoholic--I believe I was born one--its not learned--my parents rarely drank.
No one would be one by choice--believe me.
Even now after 45 years of sobriety Im aware that I cant drink safely--not one.
I dont get how most people can go out and drink socially just one o two drinks.
I see that as a waste of money--why stop short of the high?
Some of course would say its a mental illness --lack of will power --its not
A sober alcoholic, having been there, will know what I am saying is true--others may not.
Personal experience,
I dont know what it is to be gay--so cant give a valid comment.

This thread sure has gone far beyond my "expectation" and is a good thing.

Chris

[greybeard]

My views were probably quite rigid till I went through alcoholism.
Anyway people do fear anything different which is why young "potentially" gay children go through hell in school.

One of my friend's son is gay and now in a same sex relationship.
I watched him grow up and it was obvious he was different--taking great care to look "good"
At the age 16 or there abouts he was very good looking ina feminie way--hair imaculate cut in a girls style.
In school age 12/13 or there about, he got beat up by "male" class mates.
Different is prone to this.

Chris

[greybeard]

I happened to notice on the TV guide women wrestling STV thats a main TV channel here.
I had a quick view.
Mid day, peakv iewing
Im not fond of wrestling or boxing- im not inclined to watch violent things--for fun!!!!
The women certainly were not "feminine" what ever that is !!
Female boxing seemingly also gets a lot of viewers.

I just dont get it.
However I accept that people are free to do what they want--their choice.

Chris

[Hazelfern]

I stick with gender--be it male, female or anything else is natural--its down to the balance of chromosomes.

There seems to be more gays now because its safer for them to come out --not suppress their sexuality.

Some have seriously tried to make traditional marriage work and eventually ended up with a same sex relationship.
There is homosexuality in the animal realm.

Im happily male yet I have a lot of feminine traits.
So in some circumstances the strong male comes out but in others the feminine trait is the main response.

I dont think anyone is 100% male, female or other.
Some Greek soldiers seemingly had young male to see to their needs, in return they were taught to be soldiers.
Homosexuality has been a fact since the dawn of time.

Regardless all these different "lifestyles" are there--they exist--no point in trying to change that.

As a parallel im a sober alcoholic--I believe I was born one--its not learned--my parents rarely drank.
No one would be one by choice--believe me.
Even now after 45 years of sobriety Im aware that I cant drink safely--not one.
I dont get how most people can go out and drink socially just one o two drinks.
I see that as a waste of money--why stop short of the high?
Some of course would say its a mental illness --lack of will power --its not
A sober alcoholic, having been there, will know what I am saying is true--others may not.
Personal experience,
I dont know what it is to be gay--so cant give a valid comment.

This thread sure has gone far beyond my "expectation" and is a good thing.

Chris

Chris - get out of my head! This is exactly what I was thinking but you said better than I ever could.
Thanks for that.

I am glad we are on the same page.

I was thinking about this idea of social programming and how it may affect the way that people behave.
Not the type of 'programming' that has been pointed out as the root of all things amiss but plain old peer
pressure and the attempts to fit in.
As stereotypes fall away and people become freer to be who they really are, it's seems likely
that 50% of the population would be in same sex partnerships.

As a fellow AA'er I appreciate your comment that drinking to excess is also not a learned behavior.
I do feel uncomfortable that it is lumped in as a mental health issue and that recovery has become
a huge industry. - That is for another thread however.

[greybeard]

My mother worked for the civil service many moons ago.
Her boss said "Can you cook?" she was in charge of statistics and very good with figures
So she was asked to highlight the facts that suited--all else left out, ignored.

Statistics are an indicator ---rarely that accurate---I prefer personal experience.
Most stats are collected by --or for --firms that have a vested interest.
an example---Vitamins/hemp proven not to work--in fact dangerous.
Yet now hemp is being legalized, no doubt by the same companies that were instrumental in keeping it as illegal, money to be made.

Good to be on the same page Hazelfern (a day at a time)
Chris

[Vangelo]

I stumbled across this video today. I don't want to tell you anything about the video because I don't want to ruin it for you. She is an extraordinary human being.

3WMuzhQXJoY

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Voice, So cause for some compassion and deep respect for those who are wired differently.

I have more compassion than you appreciate, especially for those whose hormones are being disrupted by chemicals they aren't even aware they're ingesting. I also feel very sorry for the mentally ill and how people take advantage of them to promote political ideologies.

I care about these problems so much that I don't want to see this stuff normalized and swept under the rug as if we all just have to get used to eating and drinking atrazine now and accepting that screwed up endocrine systems are normal now and we should all just accept it.


And really, who cares if some people opt for surgery.

Well, considering that almost half of them go on to try to kill themselves, I think any compassionate person should be concerned about this behavior. Why not normalize wrist-cutting while you're at it?


As far as telling little kids they can choose their gender, I don't know. Sex ed should probably come later, all of it. The birds, the bees, the frogs.

Probably? You sound kind of ambivalent about the whole exposing pre-pubescent little kids to radical gender theories thing. A few more years of propaganda like the TED talk above and you might just be accepting of sexualizing kids for "romantic" relationships with adults. You already seem pretty open-minded to it, based on what you just said.

[A Voice from the Mountains]

I stick with gender--be it male, female or anything else is natural--its down to the balance of chromosomes.

There seems to be more gays now because its safer for them to come out --not suppress their sexuality.

Let's say that's correct. So Gen Z feels perfectly comfortable coming out as gay now, and that's why 1/3 of them don't identify as straight. So what you're suggesting is that all previous generations were also about 1/3 gay, and just hid it all this time?

Just imagine how many gay founding fathers we must have had. Or all those John Wayne movies, which were packed with homosexuals and we just never realized it.

No, I don't believe that is what is going on here. The chemical assaults on the body can't be ignored, and neither can the social propaganda over all these decades.



Some have seriously tried to make traditional marriage work and eventually ended up with a same sex relationship.

I believe that is one of the main reasons people identify as homosexual, especially certain women. There is a tremendous amount of social pressure on people today through media and everything else, that if someone isn't incredibly sexually active, there's something wrong with them.

I saw someone watching one of those degenerate Jerry Springer "baggage" shows not long ago, and one woman's "baggage" was that she hadn't had sex in five years. Prior to recent decades, that would have been a good thing that she wasn't sleeping around with everybody all the time outside of a serious relationship. But the audience actually jeered her for it! Of course, these are the people who were actually interested in sitting in on this show, which I would never have been. I just about laughed my ass off when they booed her though. I just can't help but see all of these people as really sick today, and all because of the way social programming has pushed them just in a few decades' time. Things have just become so perverted that people don't realize how far they've gone into "whore of Babylon" territory.

You're old enough Greybeard, that you know what I mean. Can you imagine someone dating a woman, and reacting negatively when she doesn't sleep around with everybody?

Anyway, I believe that same pressure does make a lot of people very insecure about themselves when they aren't able to get into long term relationships. And that pressure is very unhealthy and I believe it is probably also one of the contributing factors of why a lot of people begin identifying as homosexual, because homosexuals of either gender are well-known even in medical literature as sleeping around with an enormous number of people. It's almost as if they are trying to compensate for the healthier kinds of relationships that they are lacking.

[greybeard]

A Voice from the Mountains
I tend not to take up a fixed position
The moment you do know that you are identifying with an illusion
That's from "A course in Miracles"

A lot of what you posted I can see the logic of and of course the truth tends to lie some where in the middle.
So you may or not be right in the essence of what you post.

I had a woman friend and we talked about gay men.
Her thought was that, females had given some men such a hard time that they by choice opted for a same sex relationship.
Same could be said of women getting a mental or physical beating turning to their own sex for "companionship".
Some psychologist have said that many are bi-sexual.
If thats the case it would explain how some can----go the other way--if opposite relationships are not working.

My main thread is on Non-duality---which basically says that freewill is limited and being old a grey--Im inclined to go along with that.
Ive got into relationships knowing full well what I was getting into---great spiritual growth through having to surrender to what might have been seen to be unfair treatment and little respect for me.
Great male ego reduction.

Chris

[A Voice from the Mountains]

A lot of what you posted I can see the logic of and of course the truth tends to lie some where in the middle.

Maybe I haven't pushed the boundaries far enough to move the center then. :P

https://offgraun.files.wordpress.com/2017/12/overton-window.jpeg

This is the same psychological model they use to promote transgenderism and pedophilia and all this other stuff, by the way.

So I would say it's not the truth which is in the middle (and isn't acknowledging "truth" an acknowledgement of some theoretically fixed position, as you suggest?), but it's popular opinion which generally lies in the middle of two extremes. "Truth" has nothing to do with it.



I had a woman friend and we talked about gay men.
Her thought was that, females had given some men such a hard time that they by choice opted for a same sex relationship.

I can see that. I would imagine the "hard time" has something to do with what's happened since the "sexual liberation" and the death of chivalry, too. It all goes hand-in-hand. It's the general disruption of gender norms and everything in society that was based around them. Now these things are in chaos and confusion, with predictable results. Many people are frustrated in many ways. The suicide rates of transgenders are perhaps one of the clearest examples of that, or the fact that people who willingly have their genitals surgically mutilated at all, with the press even cheering them on for it (at least in Britain).

[greybeard]

A Voice from the Mountains -- My truth lies some where in the middle, refers to your posts mainly---not in what we are sold by the media.
Im not discounting what you or any other poster has put on this thread.
I agree totally that there is an agenda to bring fear and DE-stabalise the human race.

You posts are valued and respected by me and I am sure by others.

Chris

[KiwiElf]

A Voice from the Mountains -- My truth lies some where in the middle, refers to your posts mainly---not in what we are sold by the media.
Im not discounting what you or any other poster has put on this thread.
I agree totally that there is an agenda to bring fear and DE-stabalise the human race.

You posts are valued and respected by me and I am sure by others.

Chris

I'd use a similar "ruler" as Voice has used for gay & straight; gay at one end, straight at the other. Sexuality can & does change and for a variety of reasons. Most people, over time, fit somewhere between. (the difference perhaps between physical/sexual vs romantic attraction plays a role, too) ;)

We are all capable of both.

[greybeard]

Oh yes!!
Some who are "straight" find themselves in same sex relationships when they end up in prison.

Chris

[greybeard]

Scientists Say: If A Woman Has These 12 Qualities, Never Let Her Go


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWF3011VypQ

[greybeard]

If A Man Has These 8 Qualities, Never Let Him Go


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XT26wLpzupA

[A Voice from the Mountains]

I'd use a similar "ruler" as Voice has used for gay & straight; gay at one end, straight at the other. Sexuality can & does change and for a variety of reasons. Most people, over time, fit somewhere between. (the difference perhaps between physical/sexual vs romantic attraction plays a role, too) ;)

We are all capable of both.

I agree with that. The "over time" part is important too, because it reflects changes in hormones.

That's why I say this is all an attack on the endocrine system and is backed by social programming. No one is simply born a homosexual for life. There are a lot of factors that are playing into this.

So given all that, how reasonable is it for us as a society to accept an ongoing assault on the endocrine systems of ourselves and our children, coupled with a social push deeper and deeper into normalizing behaviors that were formerly considered degenerate and reprehensible? The Overton window has already been shifted enormously by the same social forces who have been talking about depopulation and the "problematic" nature of Western civilization for years.


And when it comes to tolerance for tolerance's sake, as if tolerance itself is inherently virtuous, you're led to things like this:


Social workers are slammed for failing to question 'articulate' adoptive gay father because they 'looked at him through a positive lens' before he killed his baby girl - as it emerges NO ONE has been disciplined

- Matthew Scully-Hicks, 31, shook Elsie Scully-Hicks and threw her down on floor
- He denied murdering her but was found guilty by a jury after a four week trial
- Murder came just two weeks after he adopted her with his husband Craig
- Elsie had broken leg and once vomited blood in series of attacks before murder
- Social services missed chances to save her and saw her 15 times before death
- Two social workers failed to notice a bruise that was on her forehead for 8 weeks
- Report says professionals 'lacked curiousity' about string of injuries she suffered

A toddler was murdered by her adoptive father under the noses of social workers and doctors who refused to accept he was anything other than a 'positive parent', a damning report revealed today.

Matthew Scully-Hicks, 31, from Cardiff, subjected 18-month-old Elsie Scully-Hicks to months of horrific assaults before killing her in an attack so severe her tiny body looked like it had been in a 'car crash'.

Scully-Hicks, who was married to husband Craig, was visited 15 times by at least three social workers and he made numerous visits to the GP and A&E when he injured Elsie - but there was 'no concern' about his parenting.

Professionals viewed him through a 'positive lens' and insisted her adoption to the middle class and well-educated gay couple was going well until she died, a Child Practice Review said.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6018673/Social-services-chief-apologises-birth-family-baby-girl-killed-gay-adoptive-fathe.html


The social workers "refused to accept he was anything other than a 'positive parent'." That is what happens when you brainwash people to be unconditionally "tolerant" for decades. The idea that a homosexual couple could be abusive to a child was such a taboo thought for these people that they denied the obvious and a child brutally died because of it.

I posted a chart before on some statistics regarding heterosexual vs. homosexual households, as far as rates of abuse and things like that. There is a significantly greater risk for children to be in these homes, more than double the risk as heterosexual households by various metrics of abuse. So this also goes with tolerance. We are tolerating greater amounts of abusive behavior towards children.

[greybeard]

A Voice from the Mountains
I am not a fan of social work.
They seem to have agenda.

In my heart of hearts I cant support same sex parenting.
Its not a logic with me just an uneasy feeling.
However logic says that if a child is carried by the mother for the 9 month in a loving relationship (female & Male)
Chances are after the pain of child birth etc then the child will be very valued by the parents.

I still maintain its natural to be gay but not natural for a gay couple to be parents.
There are exceptions to that rule obviously.

Chris

[hermit]

Where do the values from post #1 in this thread originate?

[greybeard]

Where do the values from post #1 in this thread originate?

I was born 1945--the year he war ended.
There was a community feeling--rationing--respect,suport and compassion for others was there.
Every family had lost some one.
My father was the Naval recruiting officer and Commanding Officer of the local sea Cadets

Mum had the local grocer shop--dad retired to work there.
I saw first hand service to the community--and all that is in post one.

Chris

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Where do the values from post #1 in this thread originate?

Maybe you're wanting to compare the sets of values and ideologies behind traditional Western civilization as opposed to the cultural Marxism being pushed today?

It would be a very interesting comparison. Western civilization is traditionally anchored in certain religious and social/governmental institutions that come from various sources (the Bible, the Roman Republic, the Renaissance and Enlightenment). These already create a very fertile ground for disagreement and debate, and tend to be self-moderating since we have a republican form of democracy, ie a hierarchy and structure within which to debate social changes.

What are the equivalents to these things on the modern left? Outside of Karl Marx they really don't seem to have anything to anchor onto. That's why what is "politically correct" can change so rapidly, because it's all just arbitrary "morality" anchored onto nothing substantial at all. It's like Orwell's 1984 where "truth" changes from one day to the next and when you try to look back to the past, it's all been erased because it was "evil."

[greybeard]

Many interesting posts.
Thanks
Chris

[hermit]

Where do the values from post #1 in this thread originate?

Maybe you're wanting to compare the sets of values and ideologies behind traditional Western civilization as opposed to the cultural Marxism being pushed today?

It would be a very interesting comparison. Western civilization is traditionally anchored in certain religious and social/governmental institutions that come from various sources (the Bible, the Roman Republic, the Renaissance and Enlightenment). These already create a very fertile ground for disagreement and debate, and tend to be self-moderating since we have a republican form of democracy, ie a hierarchy and structure within which to debate social changes.

What are the equivalents to these things on the modern left? Outside of Karl Marx they really don't seem to have anything to anchor onto. That's why what is "politically correct" can change so rapidly, because it's all just arbitrary "morality" anchored onto nothing substantial at all. It's like Orwell's 1984 where "truth" changes from one day to the next and when you try to look back to the past, it's all been erased because it was "evil."

I'd love to do that--except the problem is that the *vast* majority of people who think they know Marx have no clue what they're talking about. So to even go there would require a re-education that would need a thread all it's own.

No, I was actually going to point out that the values greybeard is talking about can have varied origin points, but if you go back far enough, you might be surprised where they could be seen to originate from.

And, my friend, there are other far more noble points to anchor these values from. Far nobler than Marxism.

For what it's worth? I believe Marxism is, while interesting, a flawed approach that is best ignored in application.

¤=[Post Update]=¤

greybeard, would it be a safe assumption to say that your mum had qualities that could be considered masculine expressed from a feminine perspective, and vice versa?

[greybeard]

"greybeard, would it be a safe assumption to say that your mum had qualities that could be considered masculine expressed from a feminine perspective, and vice versa? "
Yes--a very strong lady.

You are very insightful hermit.

She wanted to go to University but her Father said "No, just a waste of money--you will get married and have children and then where would all those University qualifications be of use?"

She left home and went to a city where she became manageress of the Cinema--then a civil servant--all in a mans world.
Dads wife had died of cancer --he had four children and she took him and them on.


As far as values from the first post go.
I think they are part of being a human---not part of any era or status.

The pendulum swings both ways--history shows we go from one extreme to another.
Very strict code to liberalism--probably an upward spiral though--at least I hope.

Chris

[hermit]

"Innate" :D I like to think that's what they are, at any rate. :D

[greybeard]

"Innate" :D I like to think that's what they are, at any rate. :D

Yes I can go with that hermit.
Chris

[loungelizard]

Couldn't resist, Chris ... :bigsmile:

LS37SNYjg8w

BDtVJiK8Lws

[A Voice from the Mountains]

I'd love to do that--except the problem is that the *vast* majority of people who think they know Marx have no clue what they're talking about. So to even go there would require a re-education that would need a thread all it's own.

People are free to open Marxist re-education centers in the US if they want. For some odd reason though, they were only ever built in countries like Vietnam and China. And it looks like the education typically includes hard labor. :confused:

[hermit]

Wouldn't it be simpler if people just read Marx and made up their own minds?

It'd definitely be more cost effective.

What I will say is this: both polarities in this debate are extremes. An individual who is operating from an extremity can't clearly see what's going on, and in my experience, isn't willing to concede that there might be another way of moving forward.

I don't remember my grandfathers because they both died before I was born. One was a WWI veteran, the other a WWII.

There was a different sense of responsibility present in the world, but that sense of responsibility came at a cost: the world where my grandfather's lived had clearly defined boundaries not just among sexes, but among races. There were hospitals and medical facilities built specifically for indigenous peoples in Canada. So when my mom was born, my grandmother had to travel 25 minutes outside of the town she lived because the hospital that was in town was for the people who lived on the reservation. This was backwards! But it was the way people wanted it because it supported the division.

Divisions keep people safe. People find change, and find the aspect of things changing that 'shouldn't' change as incredibly threatening, and for good reason. We are educated to believe that change equals loss.

But what are we loosing?

What are we really loosing?

A code of conduct that supported division, boundaries which limited women from reaching their full potentials as human beings (remember that you don't need to vote thing?), indigenous people not being recognized as legal human beings until the mid 20th century?

In another thread, I've read it said that my sexual identity is in fact the result of a conspiracy. I'm actually willing to entertain that possibility in order to find out what the truth is.

But let me ask this: how would the white, heterosexual male in this thread feel if they were told that their identity was in fact manipulated by the powers that be to benefit those powers?

Because I'm going to suggest that. The good olde days are a result of social engineering to make you more productive soldiers, more productive workers, to keep society in line because anything that deviates will be shut down by all the hard working men in the world and keep everything in line.

When men were men, and women were feminine, the world was operating under a different control program. So you want to use that program to create a mass shift in how people view each other, create tension, violence, create a situation where people are looking one way while you shift things in your favour? Simple. Make the people who were in the position of strength upset by shifting their power away from them.

When men were men, and women were feminine, we were in the dark. We were controlled.

Nothing's changed. Except the baby is crying because it's been suggested that the candy might be removed, or given away. And all the while, nobody is listening to the priest in the pulpit.

I wonder....why?

[Deux Corbeaux]

These Images Show The Disastrous Result Of Chemically Castrating Generations Of Men Which Could Lead To 'The Extinction Of The Human Species'

By Susan Duclos

http://allnewspipeline.com/This_Is_The_Result_Chemically_Castrating_Men.php


http://allnewspipeline.com/images/girlymenlingerie2.jpg

I could just say "nuff said and be done because a picture speaks more than a thousand words. I could also apologize to readers for the image above, which apparently has become a new "thing" amidst the all out war against men and masculinity by liberals, and the LGBT community along with today's version of feminists, but I won't apologize because it is vitally important that men be aware of the result of decades of feminizing men

THE WAR AGAINST MEN IS REAL

We have all seen the "toxic masculinity" articles and stories, where feminists and the LGBT community continuously attempt to push for the idea that "beta males" are more favorable to manly men. As a normal woman, let me assure the gentlemen reading this, nothing is farther from the truth. That is evidenced by the same people that push that nonsensical idea, also refusing to date men that have bought into the concept.

We have seen stories coming from the UK, where boys can no longer wear shorts, just trousers or "skirts," with feminists claiming that skirts shouldn't be banned but boys should be encouraged to wear female apparel in order to "break down gender stereotypes."

http://allnewspipeline.com/images/girlymendresses2.jpg

We have seen fashion houses promoting "men in dresses," and school programs targeting children here in America with drags queens offering children story hours, reading to them, with liberal websites like the Huffington Post claiming these types of kids' programs are something "we all need in our lives."

Errrr.... No, we don't.

There is no segment of society more under attack that white Christian males, but the images are the result of a decades old war against men that started with using chemicals to decimate the male population, causing decreased birth rates and the emasculation and feminization of men.

CHEMICALLY CASTRATING MEN IS PART OF THE DEPOPULATION AGENDA

It is no secret that the global elites have been pushing a depopulation agenda for decades, from the March 2009 U.N. Population Division policy brief, to prominent world figures blatantly talking about it, but what we do know is there are chemicals that every household uses every single day, that has been part of implementing the depopulation agenda over the course of time.

Xenoestrogens mimic estrogen and suppresses testosterone.

Those include Atrazine which is found in 94 percent of the U.S. drinking water, and according to Berkeley Research back in 2010, "wreaks havoc with the sex lives of adult male frogs, emasculating three-quarters of them and turning one in 10 into females."

Others include but are not limited to; Aspartame (artificial sweetener), Dioxines, Phthalates (found in plastics and vinyl), Organophosphates (pesticides), Estradiol (dairy products). These chemicals and many others used in our daily lives cause a variety of reactions from reducing sperm count, to testicular atrophy and tumors, to producing testosterone, to causing reproductive problems, birth defects and decreasing semen volume.

http://allnewspipeline.com/images/PJBOY.jpg

THE RESULTS FROM CHEMICALLY CASTRATING A GENERATION OF MEN

The results can be seen in the statistics available, such as 30 million American men are afflicted with erectile dysfunction or impotence, according to Web MD. The Census Bureau’s March 2016 Current Population Survey shows there are nearly 157 million American males.

According to Reuters in July 2017, sperm counts in men from America, Europe, Australia and New Zealand have dropped by more than 50 percent in less than 40 years. The lead author of the study, Hagai Levine, calls the results "quite shocking," stating "this is a classic under the radar huge public health problem that is really neglected. He then asserts "eventually we may have a problem and with reproduction in general. It may be the extinction of the human species." (Source)

Testosterone levels in men have also massively decreased over time, as explained at Body Well USA in October 2016:

My observations as a clinician have been confirmed by multiple studies. One of the more illuminating studies, the Massachusetts Male Aging Study (MMAS), gathered data on 1,500 randomly selected men in the Boston area in three distinct time periods over 17 years (1987-89, 1995-97, and 2002-04). It measured their total testosterone levels as well as their bioavailable testosterone levels (that is, the testosterone that was actually able to be utilized by the body) . What they found was that both total and bioavailable T levels were decreasing by 1.2% and 1.3% respectively – every year. That’s between 20.4% and 22.1% over the years of the study.

Another large study, known as The Finnish Study, suggests that the drop in T levels was significant in younger men. A man born in 1970 has 20% less testosterone than his father did at the same age. In other words, a man who’s 46 this year has 20% less testosterone than his father did when he (the father) was 46!

While there are a number of theories posed as to the cause, as that article states "Many of them center around endocrine disruptors – chemicals that interfere with your body’s hormonal systems. Perhaps it’s one or more of the fifty chemicals introduced into the food supply each week. Researchers have theorized pesticides on crops, mineral deficiencies due to factory farming, lack of sleep, and even cellphone radiation."

NCBI reported in 2016 that testosterone has become one of the most widely prescribed medications in the USA, increasing five-fold according to 2011 data.

http://allnewspipeline.com/images/girlymenLINGERIE3.jpg

BOTTOM LINE - MULTI-PRONGED ATTACK AGAINST MEN

The chemical castration and feminization of men throughout the decades was only one prong of a multi-pronged attack. Once a generation of men were already permanently altered by these everyday chemicals, then came the emotional and mental manipulation, the push for "beta males," the attacks against masculinity by calling it toxic, all in an attempt to convince men affected by the chemical castration that it is "normal" to become more feminine.

Then came the dresses for men, promoted even within some of the most prominent fashion houses. Then the use of men for cosmetics commercials.

Now..... lingerie for men.

The images shown in the article above, are the disastrous result of chemically castrating generations of men.

http://allnewspipeline.com/This_Is_The_Result_Chemically_Castrating_Men.php

[greybeard]

Dont quite agree with all your recent post hermit.
Where I do agree is that discrimination of any kind is not good.

In my youth I never felt any sense of control of self or women, no limitation.
True that is in my environment but that's my experience.

Whatever you believe--you will be able to find the proof that you are right.
If you believe in limitation you will be limited.

Chris

[greybeard]

What I will say is the doctrine of the"politically correct" has a lot to answer for.
The latest is "cultural misappropriation" only ethnic people should wear braids in their hair---and on it goes.
Not enough soap boxes to stand on.
People are free to be as they are--no need to make a grand deceleration to the world--im a this or that!!!
We are all human "being"

Chris

[Deux Corbeaux]

People are free to be as they are--no need to make a grand deceleration to the world--im a this or that!!!
We are all human "being"

Chris

Hi Chris. I don't think that's what the article was about........

http://allnewspipeline.com/This_Is_The_Result_Chemically_Castrating_Men.php
The Disastrous Result Of Chemically Castrating Generations Of Men Which Could Lead To 'The Extinction Of The Human Species',

[greybeard]

People are free to be as they are--no need to make a grand deceleration to the world--im a this or that!!!
We are all human "being"

Chris

Hi Chris. I don't think that's what the article was about........

http://allnewspipeline.com/This_Is_The_Result_Chemically_Castrating_Men.php
The Disastrous Result Of Chemically Castrating Generations Of Men Which Could Lead To 'The Extinction Of The Human Species',

Hi Deux Corbeaux
We were both posting at approx the same time.
I had not seen yours before mine went on Avalon.
Your article is excellent and fits well with the thread---mine was an overall observation and perhaps not so relevant to the thread.

Thanks for your in depth post.

Chris

[Pam]

In another thread, I've read it said that my sexual identity is in fact the result of a conspiracy. I'm actually willing to entertain that possibility in order to find out what the truth is.

But let me ask this: how would the white, heterosexual male in this thread feel if they were told that their identity was in fact manipulated by the powers that be to benefit those powers?


I think that is exactly what is being done to the white heterosexual male, or at least that is what is being attempted. There is a definite attempt through academia and the MSM to emasculate the heterosexual male and in the case of white ones, to shame and ostracize them. Black heterosexual males are also being criticized. I don't think things are looking too good for the white homosexual male as far as that goes as I see indications of intolerance in the liberal media towards them as well. After all, we need to make way for the new darlings of victim hood, the illegal immigrants and transgender folks. This is a slow,tedious game of divide and conquer.

[Merlinus]

Man/woman, biological sex, is being dissolved.

This is part of the fall of the west/fall of man, which was spearheaded by feminism, which was a stepping stone to far leftism, which will lead to the implosion of the west, which will lead to a one world gov/collective transhumanism.

[Merlinus]

Also, masculine/feminine polarity is the basis of attraction between the sexes, men have a preference for feminine women, and women to masculine men.

Without that polarity, which is the spark, the relationship crumbles.

[greybeard]

Also, masculine/feminine polarity is the basis of attraction between the sexes, men have a preference for feminine women, and women to masculine men.

Without that polarity, which is the spark, the relationship crumbles.

I agree whole heartedly.
When I played in a band--from stage I noticed that some females were attracted to "rough and ready" males.
I suspect they wanted some one strong to look after them.

For my self , on reflection, I see that the most feminine female I ever had the fortune to be with , brought out the masculine in me , in every respect.

Unfortunately I tended to be attracted to strong females, like my mother.

I really dont think we have much choice in what attracts us.
The moth gets attracted to the flame.

Chris

[Pam]

Also, masculine/feminine polarity is the basis of attraction between the sexes, men have a preference for feminine women, and women to masculine men.

Without that polarity, which is the spark, the relationship crumbles.

Merlinus, you are a very perceptive young person, I am impressed that you could understand so much at your age.I look forward to hearing more from you.

[loungelizard]

Once upon a time men and women knew exactly where they stood and what was acceptable to each.

Chris


Hi Chris

I’ve finally found the time to read through this thread properly - great to hear so many different views.
As a ‘slightly mature’ person, I can see where you’re coming from … it’s so easy to have an idealised view
of the good old days.

Which precise moment in history would you like to preserve as being the ideal, in terms of men and women?

[loungelizard]

There are only 2 biological genders. Male and female. Put them together and they make babies. That's how mammals reproduce. We are not purely spiritual beings. We have physical bodies and there are consequences to that.

When you go outside of that physical reproductive system, you're no longer talking strictly biology.

Are you denying the existence of intersex people?



Homosexuality is nonetheless heavily dependent upon social conditioning and is not a biological function.

Homosexuality is perfectly normal part the vast array of human behaviour. There are many, many fascinating studies into possible causes of homosexuality -
I suggest that you read some of these in order to broaden and deepen your understanding. Here's one to start you off:
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1529100616637616

The reason this is important is that there is a correlation between the beliefs a person holds about the origins of sexual orientation and their attitude towards
LGBT people.

¤=[Post Update]=¤


Just like Israel promotes open borders and homosexuality/transvestitism in all countries today, except for their own. "For thee but not for me!"

What does this mean? Israel is very LGBT friendly: could you explain how it ‘promotes homosexuality and transgenderism in all countries today”?

[loungelizard]

Just because an idea is uncomfortable to embrace doesn't mean it's false. But, that fear is motivating a lot of people to act out of fear rather than taking the time to breath and consider.



There is a lot of fear being expressed on this thread: fear of change, fear of loss of privilege, fear of a shift in the dynamics of power, fear of evolution
within traditions and religious beliefs….

When those in positions of privilege feel threatened by the spectre of equality, they are, quite understandably, keen to restore and maintain that privilege:
the idea of equality is perceived as oppression. It’s like one group in the nursery holding the key to the toy chest: they are terrified of any requests to share,
claiming they are under attack and victims of theft.

As someone :o once said , "“When you're accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression."

[Flash]

Loungelizard, finally someone here expressing my thoughts. Exactly, i read this thread and saw a mountain of ready made beliefs, sometimes from another era-but mental constructs of what should be, nevertheless, from that era- and fear of losing whatever one’s fear is being lost (for women and men here).

I sincerely, still with love in my heart towards everyone here, find this thread kind of (edit: quite)syrupy. All coated with sugar for a time, a situation, that never was. Or for what some of you think should be, that is, in reality, impossible to achieve and even choking if we were to achieve those should.

But syrup is what people want, with soap operas, false beliefs, changing history ( yes you are doing precisely this right here), etc. Makes me cringe truly.

And comparing north american women with asians or south americans or to women way past is truly a misunderstanding of women, wherever in the world they are from. It is not understanding women’s universal values, thinking, needs, feelings, and mostly adaptation to circumstances.

Now lets go back to the syrup in order to make YOU GUYS happy.

[greybeard]

I would not wish the hell I went through for about ten years on any one, yet--there was love in the most unlikely places and the most unlikely persons.
I am not in denial of the darkness within myself and others.
People see according to their nature.
I am not personally against anything that any one does --but they dont have to shout it out.
Im confident in me--but im not going to shout out what I am.
I accept that women would not have got the vote and much more if they had not demonstrated for their rights.

I do not honestly see that people are happier now than they were in my teens and Im not wearing blinkers about the past--the sixties was a time of freedom.
Up till then you were a carbon copy of your parents--then it was anything is ok.--do your thing and that applies to women and men.
The pendulum swings and if you see that, then there is the realization that everything is as it is.
I was married with a son at the age of 21 and all the responsibility that go with that.

Chris

Ps My son and the other four children all grew up to be a credit to themselves.
Happy to see them all regularly.

No matter what age or era or anything else people will become successful regardless of their starting point or anything else--part of success is having some gratitude --respect for others and a fair share of happiness.

[greybeard]

Once upon a time men and women knew exactly where they stood and what was acceptable to each.

Chris


Hi Chris

I’ve finally found the time to read through this thread properly - great to hear so many different views.
As a ‘slightly mature’ person, I can see where you’re coming from … it’s so easy to have an idealised view
of the good old days.

Which precise moment in history would you like to preserve as being the ideal, in terms of men and women?

There is no precise moment that is ideal for relationships or single men or women.
No matter the period --some will be happy with their lot and others not.

The question is and I cant answer it.
What works for the greatest percentage of the population regardless of their make up sexually? (chromosome balance)

Honestly my view is not idealized--there is just not enough time to write every aspect of what happened in my teens, or since, though I have eluded to it in some posts.
The thread is not about me but a place for various contributions and view points.
Thanks for your perspective.
Chris

[loungelizard]

Voice from the Mountains: you have presented a real gish gallop of claims here and, it from your posts, it appears that you are conflating homosexuality, transgenderism, cross dressing, transexuality and paedophilia. Was that your intention?

When I read much of the material you have posted, the first thing that comes to mind is that sensationalism is a great way to distract from the real issues :ROFL:




No one is simply born a homosexual for life.

I would have to respectfully disagree, based on science.


There are a lot of factors that are playing into this.

Yes, indeed there are.
Why have you honed in on just one aspect - endocrine disruption - and rejected all the other possible causes,
such as hormonal extremes during embryonic development, genes SLITRK6 and TSHR
( see https://www.newscientist.com/article/2155810-what-do-the-new-gay-genes-tell-us-about-sexual-orientation/ ),
the reaction of the mother's immune system to a male fetus ...

etc etc etc.


So given all that, how reasonable is it for us as a society to accept an ongoing assault on the endocrine systems of ourselves and our children, coupled with a social push deeper and deeper into normalizing behaviors that were formerly considered degenerate and reprehensible?


You seem to be convinced that endocrine disruptors are the only explanation for the wide range of gender
identities that human beings experience.

That makes no sense: throughout history, there are countless examples of cultures where it has been normal,
not exceptional, for people - particularly men - to have homosexual relations. It certainly wasn't considered
"degenerat and reprehensible", as many term it nowadays.

Take a look through societies throughout history. All cultures have had their own values regarding appropriate and
inappropriate sexuality; some sanctioned same-sex love and sexuality, while others disapprove.

Same sex relationships have been part of life in many ancient civilisations - Ancient China, Ancient Greece, Mesopotamia,
Ancient China, parts of Classical Europe… It’s believed that nearly all the early Roman Emperors were homosexual
(or at least, bisexual) - the Emperor Nero was married to two different young men - and for a man to only be attracted to women
was considered to be aberrant.
Pederasty was common during certain era in Japan: teenage novices would have sexual relationships with their mentors until puberty.
Ancient Greece integrated homosexuality into its society, as part of education, religion and the military.

etc etc etc.

[hermit]

Now lets go back to the syrup in order to make YOU GUYS happy.

Meh, I'm not fond of sugar. ;)

And for what it's worth? The last couple of posts have made me want to have a stand up and loudly applaud button because the thanks button just doesn't seem enough.

[loungelizard]

I happened upon this recent interview with an 85 year old man, who is finally happy: is he a mindless victim
of “cultural Marxism” or the Jews and their plot to depopulate the world, or is he simply someone who is finally
able to be what he knows he’s always been?

Reading through this thread, I found myself considering the kind of world I would prefer to live in...

Is it a world where people are squashed into boxes, with clearly defined roles and identities?
Where transgender and other non-conforming individuals are maligned as paedophiles, rapists, and molesters?

Or is it a world where people can follow their personal, deeply felt internal and individual experience of gender,
which may or may not correspond with the sex they were assigned at birth?

If someone has a problem with this, they have a problem :o

Z9Zr4B_Huko

[greybeard]

"The moment you take up a position know that you are identifying with an illusion"
Now that might not really fit in with this thread

Im inclined to see consciousness acting out in in various levels.
"Nothing is right nor wrong till thinking makes it so."
Mystics will say that you are beyond definition--not male nor female, that is the vehicle the body that is used for this visitation on earth., in reality you are formless.
Spirit having a human experience.

People are free to be whatever they believe themselves to be.
But there is perhaps not an acceptance of what is.
There is perhaps the thought, if only "If only" I was different--thinner, had a different body, had a different partner,---you can put anything to it but the basic thought is that some thing else rather than this and I would be happy fulfilled etc.
Is that true?
Does going through gender changing surgery lead to contentment?
However that's down to the personal choice.
Im not against change--my life has seen many changes--many for the better.

I am against the state legislating for the better good of all--ha ha.

The purpose of the thread is to give anyone who wants to, the opportunity to express their thoughts on the subject.
The thread has gone further than I expected but that's great.
Thanks for all the contributions.

Chris

[greybeard]

Ps I will again say that "politically correct"has imposed limitations.
Regardless one mans or woman's freedom is seen as going beyond "unwritten" acceptable behaviour.
You cant just touch innocently some one of the opposite sex without being accused of sexual inpropriety--etc.

Chris

[greybeard]

Misogyny could be made a hate crime as MPs vote on banning upskirting

Misogyny could be treated as a hate crime under new laws banning upskirting that are due to be voted on by MPs.

Labour MP Stella Creasy is seeking an amendment to new anti-voyeurism legislation that will make taking unsolicited pictures under someone’s clothing a crime.

The Voyeurism (Offences) Bill, which has the Prime Minister’s backing in its current form, will close a gap in the law and allow judges to jail offenders for up to two years.

It is due to go before the Commons on Wednesday.

Ms Creasy’s amendment states it will “ensure that if the crime is motivated by misogyny then that will be considered by a court as an aggravating factor when considering the seriousness of the crime for the purposes of sentencing”.

The amended law would allow a sentencing judge to take into account if the offender “demonstrated towards the victim of the offence hostility based on the victim having (or being presumed to have) a particular sex characteristic”.


https://uk.yahoo.com/news/misogyny-made-hate-crime-mps-prepare-historic-vote-084351851.html

[loungelizard]

I'd love to do that--except the problem is that the *vast* majority of people who think they know Marx have no clue what they're talking about. So to even go there would require a re-education that would need a thread all it's own.



You’re so right! Anyone who has any idea of what Marxism dialectics actually are (and I certainly really struggle with that …)
would know that the term 'cultural Marxism' makes no sense.

In A Voice from the Mountain's post 73 of this thread, there is an attempt to portray feminism as the outcome of a plot
to destroy history and tradition in the capitalist West: that's nothing new. ‘Cultural Marxism’ is basically repackaged ‘cultural Bolshevism’
of the Nazi party. It’s a snarl term used (particularly in the US) to discredit dissenters and progressives who are supposedly
trying to destroy “the American way of life”.

But actually, cultural Marxism is a complete fantasy ;) It’s simply propaganda and, as such, it’s not responsible for the spread
of atheism, of gay rights, of feminism, of socialism etc etc. There isn’t a nasty little group of cultural Marxists - Jewish, of course -
under the bed, plotting to overthrow the lovely white, straight, Christian culture (even though the likes of the Tea Party and
Andreas Breivik would like you to think so).

The fact that, in the 1930s, a very small group of German, left-wing, dissident Marxist social theorists (the Frankfurt School)
spoke about the harms inherent in capitalism, industrialisation and the commercialisation of culture that takes
people away from essential human values (something I thought most members of PA would agree with) does not
equate to a wholesale take-over of “Western civilisation” by a group of left-leaning Jews.

The idea of cultural Marxism as part of an ongoing war against Western society is a spectre that is wheeled out by those of a
certain mindset to try and explain trends in society. Mention the word “Marxism” and (particularly in the US) you are assured
of a kneejerk reaction.

Feminists have been around for hundreds (maybe thousands) of years … feminism has its roots in the activism of real,
courageous people.

Pretending that societal change is an ideology forced upon us by a group of sinister thinkers distracts us and confuses us,
thus allowing inequality and privilege to persist in the form of the status quo. Instead of facing up to inequality and oppression,
it’s much easier to post extremist material for the shock effect.

[loungelizard]

Yeah, back when child-bearing was still considered a social duty, and people were considered oddballs if they didn't want to raise a family

Taking care of children is one of the most feminine things a woman can do.

That’s all truly great - if that’s the choice each woman makes. I do wonder, from your writings on this thread, whether
you consider it is the right of a woman to choose what to do with her own life. We know from history that, in uncertain times,
men feel the need to tighten their ideological grip on women and reaffirm their perception of the role females should adopt
(ie the biological role of mother) - and it seems that is what you are doing here. And history also shows the dangers in that.

The idea that bearing children is a social duty sets alarm bells ringing when considered, for example, in the light of the
damage inflicted on society in Spain (within living memory) by Fransisco Franco, who imposed strict societal roles on women,
preparing them to be mothers and educating them in the preservation of femininity.

Spanish women were told that their ultimate destiny was that of wife and mother, and contraception was banned.
Their opportunities for any other lifestyle were controlled by law, and it wasn’t until 1978 that the permiso marital -
a law whereby a wife was prohibited from almost all economic activities, including employment, ownership of property,
or even travel away from home was abolished.

Interestingly, in Franco’s Spain, women were blamed for the “reddening” of Spanish society and for the spread of Marxism,
because they had failed to play their proper role as women.
The cultural subversives use feminism as their chosen vessel of disruption. Echoes of some claims on this thread … :facepalm:

[greybeard]

Context context context.
Its no surprise that posts can be misunderstood,

To give an example.
Some time ago an Arab with a harem was interviewed and the interviewer went as far as to say, that such a situation was uncivilized.
The Arab laughed and said perhaps your normality is uncivilized

You expect one woman, your wife, to be multi functional.
House keeper, cook, part financial provider, mother to your children, lover and more.

In my country when a woman's husband dies, she may be taken into a harem with her children.
The man who has the wealth may perhaps support many women and children and other relatives..

So what is correct in one situation might not be seen to be in another.

There does seem to accepted boundaries in most civilizations--ie abuse of children or the vulnerable not acceptable.
Otherwise what happens between consensual adults is mainly accepted or becoming so---exceptions to every rule of course.
Not that long ago Homosexuality was a criminal offence in UK.

Chris

[hermit]

I'd love to do that--except the problem is that the *vast* majority of people who think they know Marx have no clue what they're talking about. So to even go there would require a re-education that would need a thread all it's own.



You’re so right! Anyone who has any idea of what Marxism dialectics actually are (and I certainly really struggle with that …)
would know that the term 'cultural Marxism' makes no sense.

In A Voice from the Mountain's post 73 of this thread, there is an attempt to portray feminism as the outcome of a plot
to destroy history and tradition in the capitalist West: that's nothing new. ‘Cultural Marxism’ is basically repackaged ‘cultural Bolshevism’
of the Nazi party. It’s a snarl term used (particularly in the US) to discredit dissenters and progressives who are supposedly
trying to destroy “the American way of life”.

But actually, cultural Marxism is a complete fantasy ;) It’s simply propaganda and, as such, it’s not responsible for the spread
of atheism, of gay rights, of feminism, of socialism etc etc. There isn’t a nasty little group of cultural Marxists - Jewish, of course -
under the bed, plotting to overthrow the lovely white, straight, Christian culture (even though the likes of the Tea Party and
Andreas Breivik would like you to think so).

The fact that, in the 1930s, a very small group of German, left-wing, dissident Marxist social theorists (the Frankfurt School)
spoke about the harms inherent in capitalism, industrialisation and the commercialisation of culture that takes
people away from essential human values (something I thought most members of PA would agree with) does not
equate to a wholesale take-over of “Western civilisation” by a group of left-leaning Jews.

The idea of cultural Marxism as part of an ongoing war against Western society is a spectre that is wheeled out by those of a
certain mindset to try and explain trends in society. Mention the word “Marxism” and (particularly in the US) you are assured
of a kneejerk reaction.

Feminists have been around for hundreds (maybe thousands) of years … feminism has its roots in the activism of real,
courageous people.

Pretending that societal change is an ideology forced upon us by a group of sinister thinkers distracts us and confuses us,
thus allowing inequality and privilege to persist in the form of the status quo. Instead of facing up to inequality and oppression,
it’s much easier to post extremist material for the shock effect.

Then there's the problem of...if Marxism is part of the dialectic, what happens when Marxism has been ground up and pushed through? Does the theory then become irrelevant because it's been moved on by a better theory?


That...and 99.99% of people today who claim to be Marxists have no clue about the definitions of capitalism, and automatically assume that the western world currently lives under a capitalist model.

WRONG. :D


---


That would be like assuming you understand the nuances of queer identity based on biblical and social interpretation that's based on a model thoroughly engaged by the Military Industrial Complex to help manipulate large populations...but....instead of going there, let's watch more reality tv instead.... *duck emoji duck emoji duck emoji*

:D

[loungelizard]

The Supreme Court in India has decriminalised consensual gay sex. 'Bout time for the world's biggest 'democracy'.

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/supreme-court-verdict-on-section-377-live-updates/liveblog/65694784.cms

"Justice Indu Malhotra says history owes an apology to members of LGBT community and their families for ostracisation
and persecution they faced because of society's ignorance that homosexuality is a natural trait; its penal suppression
infringes a host of fundamental rights.

"The Supreme Court terms sexual orientation as biological phenomenon, and says any discrimination on this grounds
is violative of fundamental rights."

One more down ... but there are still more than 70 countries where homosexuality it illegal
(and 10 where it's punishable by death! :facepalm: )

[Hazelfern]

loungelizard - hermit - I am breathing a sigh of relief since you posted on this thread.

[greybeard]

Its good to have a space where one can freely express one self
Chris

[greybeard]

Malaysian PM says caning of lesbians counter to 'compassion of Islam

UALA LUMPUR (Reuters) - Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad on Thursday denounced the caning of two Muslim women for attempting lesbian sex, a sentence that sparked outrage and raised fears about the treatment of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) community.

The women had pleaded guilty to charges under Islamic laws forbidding lesbian sex. They were caned on Monday in front of dozens of people at a sharia court in Terengganu, a conservative state in the east, prompting an outcry from human rights activists, who described the punishment as torture.

Mahathir's government has appeared divided about the LGBT community, while the premier himself had been silent on the caning and recent attacks on transgender people and marginalized groups in the Muslim-majority country.

In a video posted on his Twitter account, Mahathir said the caning "did not reflect the justice or compassion of Islam".

It was the women's first offence, he said, which warranted a lighter sentence, such as counseling.

"This gives a bad impression of Islam," the 93-year-old leader said. "It is important that we show Islam is not a cruel religion that likes to impose harsh sentences to humiliate others."

The LGBT community is routinely persecuted in Malaysia, where it is seen as a threat to conservative values.

Mahathir's government swept into power in May after campaigning on a reform agenda, but has been unconvincing in its handling of matters relating to race, religion and minorities in the multi-racial country.

The caning followed a series of incidents in recent weeks that civil rights groups say illustrate growing hostility against gay and transgender people.

Last month, a gay bar in Kuala Lumpur was raided by police and religious enforcement officials, while a transgender woman was beaten up by a group of assailants in Seremban, near the capital.

The minister in charge of Islamic affairs also came under fire, including from other ruling party lawmakers, after he ordered the removal of portraits of two LGBT activists from an art exhibition.

Malaysia describes oral and anal sex as against the order of nature. Civil law stipulates jail for up to 20 years, caning and fines for offenders, although enforcement of the law is rare.

Muslims are also governed by state-level Islamic laws, most of which carry provisions outlawing same-sex acts.

(Reporting by Rozanna Latiff; editing by Praveen Menon and Nick Macfie)




https://uk.yahoo.com/news/malaysian-pm-says-caning-lesbians-060842230.html

[greybeard]

Regardless I would suggest that it is in the interest of the human race that Woman and Man with their Children are seen as the hub of family life.
Exceptions to every rule accepted----- and all forms of partnerships and consensual love making.
I feel that its important that the traditional family with all its flaws is promoted and supported. (Without excluding others)

Chris

[greybeard]

Keeping it very basic---
Every Human came about through physical inter action between a man and a woman.
Chris

[petra]

THE WAR AGAINST MEN IS REAL

The chemical castration and...

That's as far as I got before going into a rage...

I just skimmed through, but chemical castration? Did I wake up in another universe again? This is just... putrid. Pardon me while I try not to barf.



I sincerely, still with love in my heart towards everyone here, find this thread kind of (edit: quite)syrupy. All coated with sugar for a time, a situation, that never was. Or for what some of you think should be, that is, in reality, impossible to achieve and even choking if we were to achieve those should.

But syrup is what people want, with soap operas, false beliefs, changing history ( yes you are doing precisely this right here), etc. Makes me cringe truly.

Oh don't cringe.... I'm sorry, but that's just making my laugh and cry all at once. I, for one, am so glad you said so. Because I didn't really notice until you pointed it out!!!


Now lets go back to the syrup in order to make YOU GUYS happy.

Meh, I'm not fond of sugar. ;)

And for what it's worth? The last couple of posts have made me want to have a stand up and loudly applaud button because the thanks button just doesn't seem enough.

I'd like to applaud too! I am loving the "sugar" though... because it's helping me to understand.

I used to have similar views of what "should be" or what I expected to be, but I realized that I was lying to myself. There was a lot of anger. That was the catalyst for change... but just not sure if it was a good change. I calmed down anyway, so that's good :)



One more down ... but there are still more than 70 countries where homosexuality it illegal
(and 10 where it's punishable by death! :facepalm: )

That's just shocking, and I'm so embarrassed. This whole planet is just so ridiculous that it's embarrassing, I had no idea it was this embarrassing...

Using our love against us seem to be a common theme.

[greybeard]

"Get over it"That's an expression that sometimes fits--
There is genuine discrimination but a lot of jumping on whatever band wagon that is politically correct at the moment.
There is a drop in the sperm count just now however that could be brought about by natural causes --if you can call Wi Fi, pesticides etc natural.
People want to have an enemy out there---not everything is brought about by agenda of "The powers that be" whoever or what ever they may be.

Chris

[hermit]

Since you're aware of what discrimination feels like, you have an active and justifiable means to understand how other people feel when they are discriminated against.

Having that understanding, can you see how the opinions expressed in this thread have been harmful and hurtful to some?

Would you be willing to consider an apology give that you have an immediate understanding of what prejudice feels like?

Can we then, after that, consider ways and means of moving beyond the mode of victim capital?

Good discussions here!

[greybeard]

Since you're aware of what discrimination feels like, you have an active and justifiable means to understand how other people feel when they are discriminated against.

Having that understanding, can you see how the opinions expressed in this thread have been harmful and hurtful to some?

Would you be willing to consider an apology give that you have an immediate understanding of what prejudice feels like?

Can we then, after that, consider ways and means of moving beyond the mode of victim capital?

Good discussions here!

I am sorry that some have been hurt by posts on this thread--that certainly was not my intention on starting the thread which has wandered far from the original post and that's fine.
When people are free to voice their opinions then unfortunately people can feel hurt.

For me nothing is taken personally but not every one is fortunate enough to understand that.
Yes I went through a lot of discrimination for various reasons that im not going into here--but it led to suicidal feelings--I had to get over that.

Chris

[loungelizard]

Some time ago an Arab with a harem was interviewed and the interviewer went as far as to say, that such a situation was uncivilized.
The Arab laughed and said perhaps your normality is uncivilized

You expect one woman, your wife, to be multi functional.
House keeper, cook, part financial provider, mother to your children, lover and more.

In my country when a woman's husband dies, she may be taken into a harem with her children.

Chris

That made me laugh! ;) Anyone think to actually ask these women under discussion here what they’d like to do,
rather than merely assigning them their roles? Do they only have the choice of either domestic goddess or re-homed pet?!

[loungelizard]

I feel that its important that the traditional family with all its flaws is promoted and supported. (Without excluding others)

Chris


Why?
Given that there are hundreds of different models of “traditional” families in hundreds of cultures
throughout the world, why do you think that the image of the idealised “traditional” family that we were sold in the
1950s is so important? (I'm assuming that you're referring to the nuclear family here).

Of course, the family unit is the building block of any society - children need strong, caring and
trusted family units - but families can and do take a multitude of forms.

But ‘Family’ is not a fixed concept: it means different things to different people, and is largely
dependent on the culture in which we live - and one form can’t be held up as being superior to
all the others - it’s not as simple as that, unfortunately.

Personally, I quite like the Mosuo culture! It’s a ‘society without fathers’ on the China/Tibet border -
The Kingdom of Women - where marriage of any form simply doesn’t exist.
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/apr/01/the-kingdom-of-women-the-tibetan-tribe-where-a-man-is-never-the-boss

For me, the form a family takes is irrelevant. Whether the parents are biological, step or adoptive,
or gay/straight/trans/bi, or the family is nuclear/extended/communal, alloparental, single/polygamous,
or the parents’s relationship is romantic or arranged really doesn’t matter - and it’s certainly not the gender
or sexual orientation of the parents that raises a healthy human being.

All the things that children need - love, nurture, trust, patience, security, understanding, boundaries,
acceptance, respect, affection, good counsel, compassion, empathy, guidance etc etc etc - can be provided
by many, many different types of adults in a whole variety of relationships.

Equally, poverty, uncertainty, instability, absent parenting, conflict, neglect etc etc - all the obstacles that
harm children - can happen in every type of family you can think of.

[greybeard]

Whatever works.
Chris

[loungelizard]

I am sorry that some have been hurt by posts on this thread--that certainly was not my intention on starting the thread which has wandered far from the original post and that's fine.
When people are free to voice their opinions then unfortunately people can feel hurt.

Chris


Your contributions to this forum are a good example of how to express an opinion simply and without causing pain.
On the other hand, a few of the posts on this thread go far beyond mere opinions: they may masquerade as opinions but
are deliberately contrived to cause hurt and to spread division and bigotry.


There is a massive difference between voicing your opinions and being insulting, hostile and disparaging.
When someone explains, rationally and politely, why they don’t approve of, for example, same-sex marriage,
I would respect their opinion.

But if they try insist that gays are deviants (as one poster here has done) or resort to inflammatory or
toxic language with the intention of demonising a particular group, they’re not just voicing an opinion.
They’re using verbal aggression to imply that not everyone in this world has equal rights.

In fact, the venomous nature of some of the posts here does bring to mind the old adage
"Homophobes Might Be Hidden Homosexuals" :
A new analysis of implicit bias and explicit sexual orientation statements may help to explain
the underpinnings of anti-gay bullying and hate crimes

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/homophobes-might-be-hidden-homosexuals/

¤=[Post Update]=¤


Whatever works.
Chris

And wouldn’t the world be a much happier place if people acted in accordance with those simple words? :thumbsup:

[greybeard]

Loungelizard my signature --all of it including the link more or less covers were I am coming from.

To be very clear--I think homosexuality is perfectly natural--same sex marriages fine.
All of that can be alongside what I call traditional family which of course is different for every country.
It comes back to whatever works.

Anyone who lived in Scotland in my childhood and teens would see where the first post came from--after the war there was a sense of community caring for each other and respect. Some of our parents had been through the hell of two wars.
Then the sixties was very free, relaxed and easy but there was a respect for teachers police and authority which does not now seem to be present.

Chris

[Flash]

Not only opinions on homosexuals from some posters in this thread are derogatory, but also some strong opinions about what women feminity should and should’nt be, comparisons between women from different countries, backgrounds or times, to the detriment of the actual North American women (and Europeans as well) all without objective historia and cultural context is really hitting women and homosexuals in a rather ... well.., gosh it hurts, I thought We had to go back to what I have seen being done to gays and women half a century ago.

Would have been so nice to have this topic discussed based on actual cultural studies and historical facts instead of dreamland sources. Every post having to bring supportive evidence, instead of mere opinions (often biaised for lack of information or skewed belief system from the given poster)




I am sorry that some have been hurt by posts on this thread--that certainly was not my intention on starting the thread which has wandered far from the original post and that's fine.
When people are free to voice their opinions then unfortunately people can feel hurt.

Chris


Your contributions to this forum are a good example of how to express an opinion simply and without causing pain.
On the other hand, a few of the posts on this thread go far beyond mere opinions: they may masquerade as opinions but
are deliberately contrived to cause hurt and to spread division and bigotry.


There is a massive difference between voicing your opinions and being insulting, hostile and disparaging.
When someone explains, rationally and politely, why they don’t approve of, for example, same-sex marriage,
I would respect their opinion.

But if they try insist that gays are deviants (as one poster here has done) or resort to inflammatory or
toxic language with the intention of demonising a particular group, they’re not just voicing an opinion.
They’re using verbal aggression to imply that not everyone in this world has equal rights.

In fact, the venomous nature of some of the posts here does bring to mind the old adage
"Homophobes Might Be Hidden Homosexuals" :
A new analysis of implicit bias and explicit sexual orientation statements may help to explain
the underpinnings of anti-gay bullying and hate crimes

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/homophobes-might-be-hidden-homosexuals/

¤=[Post Update]=¤


Whatever works.
Chris

And wouldn’t the world be a much happier place if people acted in accordance with those simple words? :thumbsup:

[greybeard]

The thread started off as fairly specific--Men and Women in a fairly specific time period from a single point of view.
I was there then, that was my experience
Some will agree some not.

People experience very often according to their mind set.
Some just dont see the good--some dont see the opposite.

Its all Maya, but very real in this world of duality.

Statistics--how do you measure respect and community togetherness?

However the media of today give statistics of ever increasing divorce rates--suicides --anti depressant sales up through the roof--self harm, increased crimes of violence, moped mugging gangs, paramedics , firemen being assaulted. stabbings, drive by shootings, increasing rapes of females and males, even more child abuse, though thats not new, parents killing their children, Drs and nurses killing patients.
The list is endless.
Now I could say that lack of a stable upbringing is the cause--there might be statistics to prove for or against--I dont know.

Anyway I have respect for all opinions and dont dismiss them out of hand even when I dont agree.
I thank all posts because the person took the time and effort to contribute.
I disagree with quite a few posts on this thread, but their experience is valid for them.

Chris

[greybeard]

One word running through this thread "RESPECT" or lack of it.

Chris

[greybeard]

Only Fools And Horses viewers 'would call Del Boy a pervert in 2018', says Marlene
Del Boy is considered one of British TV's finest comedy characters

He is one of the greatest comedy characters in British TV, the hapless wheeler dealer loved for his get-rich-quick schemes, Cockney catchphrases and dodgy French.

But a former Only Fools And Horses star has said viewers in 2018 would probably not see the funny side of Del Boy if he came new to our TV screens today.

Sue Holderness, who played Boycie's flirtatious wife Marlene in the 1980s sitcom - which starred Sir David Jason and Nicholas Lyndhurst as Derek and Rodney Trotter - says political correctness has gone too far and people now would be calling for Del to be locked up.

"The very first episode, Del gave me a big hug, kissed me fondly and pinched my arse and nobody took any offence at it, except Boycie who looked daggers," she said.

"And every time we met that would happen. It's quite fun."

Holderness said she feels sorry for men nowadays "because I don't know how you cope".

"I don't think you would get away with Del Boy pinching Marlene's bottom without everybody saying, 'He's a pervert and that shouldn't be allowed and he should be locked-up.'"

The 69-year-old said that while she supports movements such as #MeToo , men now "don't know how to behave" because "almost anything can be deemed inappropriate".

"A wolf whistle isn't supposed to be allowed now, which I think is such a pity," she said. "It has gone too far.

"I'm sure it will swing back and eventually we'll be able to flirt away again, but at the moment I don't think it's possible."

She went on to discuss criticism of the show being racist, saying: "There have been people saying you could never make Only Fools And Horses now, that it was racist.

"It wasn't remotely racist. Del and Rodney and all that community, there wasn't a racist ounce in their body."

Holderness also spoke about her experiences of the gender pay gap, saying: "Of course women should be paid as much as men. I'm praying that there will be more parts written for women, which is happening.

"I was paid much, much less than John Challis (Boycie) on Only Fools And Horses, and when we got to (spin-off) The Green Green Grass, the BBC did the decent thing and we got parity."

Holderness is reuniting with Sir David in the new series of BBC1 sitcom Still Open All Hours.

She said working with him again for the first time since 2001 felt "like coming home" and "putting on some old slippers".


This what I have been trying to get across--and this was written by a woman who was there, then.

Where has the "fun " gone?

Chris
https://uk.yahoo.com/movies/only-fools-horses-viewers-call-del-boy-pervert-140800837.html

[Pam]

Not only opinions on homosexuals from some posters in this thread are derogatory, but also some strong opinions about what women feminity should and should’nt be, comparisons between women from different countries, backgrounds or times, to the detriment of the actual North American women (and Europeans as well) all without objective historia and cultural context is really hitting women and homosexuals in a rather ... well.., gosh it hurts, I thought We had to go back to what I have seen being done to gays and women half a century ago.

Would have been so nice to have this topic discussed based on actual cultural studies and historical facts instead of dreamland sources. Every post having to bring supportive evidence, instead of mere opinions (often biaised for lack of information or skewed belief system from the given poster)

[QUOTE=loungelizard;1249006][QUOTE=greybeard;1247914]
I am sorry that some have been hurt by posts on this thread--that certainly was not my intention on starting the thread which has wandered far from the original post and that's fine.
When people are free to voice their opinions then unfortunately people can feel hurt.

Chris


Your contributions to this forum are a good example of how to express an opinion simply and without causing pain.
On the other hand, a few of the posts on this thread go far beyond mere opinions: they may masquerade as opinions but
are deliberately contrived to cause hurt and to spread division and bigotry.


There is a massive difference between voicing your opinions and being insulting, hostile and disparaging.
When someone explains, rationally and politely, why they don’t approve of, for example, same-sex marriage,
I would respect their opinion.

But if they try insist that gays are deviants (as one poster here has done) or resort to inflammatory or
toxic language with the intention of demonising a particular group, they’re not just voicing an opinion.
They’re using verbal aggression to imply that not everyone in this world has equal rights.

In fact, the venomous nature of some of the posts here does bring to mind the old adage
"Homophobes Might Be Hidden Homosexuals" :
A new analysis of implicit bias and explicit sexual orientation statements may help to explain
the underpinnings of anti-gay bullying and hate crimes

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/homophobes-might-be-hidden-homosexuals/

¤=[Post Update]=¤


Whatever works.
Chris

And wouldn’t the world be a much happier place if people acted in accordance with those simple words? :thumbsup





:[




Below is a quote from one of your earlier posts on this thread, Flash. I would call that a derogatory opinion.


All todays stats says the same: women make 30% less than men on average, and work twice as hard in the workforce, which in fact makes a 70% differential. It was also that way in the old time. I have seen it my whole life. Very few woman really have the steady support of their male, independently of the culture, civilisation, or Rockerfellers of this world - the latter only utilised a pre-existing make up.

[greybeard]

My last post was really expressing my feelings and in line with the thread heading, nothing to do with predudice in any form --the thread got expanded, you might say hijacked, beyond the original intention--thats ok

ch

[pigsy2400]

There has been some scientific studies into the effect on the birth control pill and its effects on what women perceive to be attractive in a man as a result of continued use.

In summary, women that have continually used the pill, as a method of birth control have found "masculine" looking men less attractive and found men that are more feminine in appearance more attractive.

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/03/study-women-on-birth-control-pills-prefer-less-masculine-men/274464/

Its quite fascinating reading...

Its also very much a cultural thing I feel also, depending on the cultural background and what is perceived as "attractive" as this varies wildly. Beauty as they say is in the eye of the beholder....and depends if you are on birth control or not...apparently.
:)

[britman]

We have to live as man or a woman many times, therein lie the karmic penalties for cruel treatment. If this was realised it would make a difference to men.
Chivalry is not dead, but not always appreciated these days
In a mystical sense a woman is a reflection of the Godess who creates, and therefore worthy of respect.

[greybeard]

We have to live as man or a woman many times, therein lie the karmic penalties for cruel treatment. If this was realised it would make a difference to men.
Chivalry is not dead, but not always appreciated these days
In a mystical sense a woman is a reflection of the Godess who creates, and therefore worthy of respect.

You will have seen a lot in your years here britman.
Yes women are deserving of respect.
If men had to go through the 9 month of carrying then give birth---then the population would be very much smaller.
The Mother is the first and most important teacher.
Chris

[Flash]

Couldn't resist

Role reversal comedy, when a macho unconscious man is treated as women are by macho as unconscious women - if you speak French it is funnier, the American remake of this French comedy has not been made yet (I always prefer the originals anyhow, in whichever language)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VENlBR42HR0

[Ba-ba-Ra]

We have to live as man or a woman many times, therein lie the karmic penalties for cruel treatment. If this was realised it would make a difference to men.
Chivalry is not dead, but not always appreciated these days
In a mystical sense a woman is a reflection of the Godess who creates, and therefore worthy of respect.

Yes women are deserving of respect.

Everyone is deserving of respect


If men had to go through the 9 month of carrying then give birth---then the population would be very much smaller.

Maybe. If you are suggesting carrying a baby for 9 months is hard work, I would say only in the last month. Whereas many men who have to do hard physical labor for a lifetime.


The Mother is the first and most important teacher.
Chris

Perhaps, but in a 2 parent family I'm seeing fathers being equally important teachers - and sometimes grandparents. I'm not trying to diminish the women's role here. Hopefully what I'm conveying again is equality. Here in the US, a good percentage of the mother's go back to work after 3 months. Sometimes nannies are employed, sometimes grandparents take over, oftentimes the children go immediately into daycare. In some cases, where the woman makes more money, the father's stay home with the child.

[greybeard]

Yes Ba-ba-Ra
Respect and equality.
When I said carrying, it was more the things that go with being pregnant--morning sickness--sore backs-the works.
Thanks for your post.
Chris

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Some things that reminded me of this thread in the news lately:


This Picture Sums It Up Pretty Well… Transgender Wrestler Taking Testosterone Injections Wins 2nd Texas ‘Girls’ State Wrestling Title

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/uploads/wrestler-girls-trans-600x350.jpg

The Washington Times reported:

For the second year in a row, a transgender wrestler has won the Texas girls’ Class 6A 110-pound division.

Mack Beggs, an 18-year-old senior from Euless Trinity High School near Dallas, entered the tournament in Cypress outside of Houston with an undefeated record. He beat Chelsea Sanchez — whom he beat for the title in 2017- in the final match Saturday.

Video posted online showed a mix of cheers and boos from the crowd following Beggs‘ win.

Beggs is in the process of transitioning from female to male and taking a low-dose of testosterone.

Mack Beggs won the title last year too.

Mark Beggs is transgendering to be a boy.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/12/this-picture-sums-it-up-pretty-well-transgender-wrestler-taking-testosterone-injections-wins-2nd-texas-girls-state-wrestling-title/

I don't even know where to start commenting on this. First of all, wrestling is just such a feminine thing for women to be doing in the first place, you have to laugh. Second, this girl "identifies" as a boy, yet she's still on the girls' wrestling team? And then for supposedly sane adults to let her take testosterone injections and then beat up on estrogen-filled girls on a wrestling mat, and the adults responsible pretend that it's in any way fair purely on the level of sportsmanship? And this is happening in Texas? Not even under the early Soviet government or during the Weimar period have I heard of so much gender-confusion stacked up in one place.


And then there's this: a feminist who is brought to tears after simply being asked if men and women have natural, biological strengths and weaknesses in relation to one another.

312sbdaZVUo

First she's asked what women are better at than men, and she has no problem answering that, and seems very enthusiastic.

Then she's asked what men are better at than women, and can't think of anything, except, finally, after a lot of hesitation, she says something like "guarding their emotions," which is obviously meant in a condescending and derogatory way.

When the guy interviewing her suggests other things that men naturally tend to be better at, she gets really awkward, and then literally goes off and starts crying. SJWism has become a religion, and its followers absolutely cannot tolerate religious dissent, even from basic scientific facts of biology.

[greybeard]

Woman snaps after date refuses to pay her £99 food bill
https://uk.yahoo.com/style/woman-snaps-date-refuses-pay-99-food-bill-133510610.html

A guy has shared the barrage of abusive messages he received from a woman, after refusing to pay for her food after a date.

And while that may sound like a douche move, the internet is actually on his side.

Taking to Reddit to share a series of screenshots of the conversation, user CuteBananaMuffin explained he thought the date had gone pretty well until he messaged the woman to ask her out again.

In a thread titled ‘Well… There goes the ‘friendship’ with her’ he revealed that she had expected him to pay her for her meal, even though it was six-times more expensive than his.

“After what you did to me last time you expect me to go out with you again? Wow,” she launched the attack.

When the man, thought to be from Ireland, asked what he had done she replied, “You made me pay for my own food and drink while you paid for only yours wtf.”

But he was quick to defend himself.

“So? You invited me lol, you are lucky you didn’t pay for my food too, plus I got a carbonara and a beer while you got lobster and €80 [£72] wine.‘

“My food was €17.50 (£19) while yours was €110 [£99]. And you were really expecting me to pay that? I’m a student not your sugar daddy.”

She refused to see any reason however, going on to slam the guy as “so rude”, and going so far as to say that he was clearly “gay” because “gentlemen ALWAYS pay for a girl’s food”.

She finished up by saying, “F*** off. All you wanted was to just have sex with me, bye loser.”

Chris says
"Well that's not my idea of feminine."

[Bill Ryan]

:bump: :bump: :bump:

[greybeard]

Thanks Bill -- Those were the days -- life so simple.
Relatively free.
Chris

[Ernie Nemeth]

I think it is the man that brings out the female in a woman. And the woman who brings out the male in a man.

Bull**** posturing quickly melts away when one meets the other.

[Bill Ryan]

:bump: :bump: :bump:

[greybeard]

It would seem that men are becoming more feminine and women more bullish or is that my imagination?
Chris

[Dorjezigzag]

Throwing this into the mix,

synthesizing the panorama of Sexuality and Gender Identity within Shamanism,

Introduction - 00:00
Spirit Spouse - 01:50
Spirit Spouse Gender - 08:55
Feminine Tutelary Spirits - 18:30
Shamanic Sexual illness - 35:50
Gender and Sexual Identity in Shamanism - 45:00
Old Norse "Spirit Spouse - 56:53

UBbExHXxcL4

[East Sun]

I think it is the man that brings out the female in a woman. And the woman who brings out the male in a man.

Bull**** posturing quickly melts away when one meets the other.

Hey Ernie,
That's a great observation. Wish I had said that.

[Karen (Geophyz)]

I don't want attention. For as long as I can remember I wanted to be a scientist. I had a neighbor who let me read their National Geographic. I dreamed of traveling to exotic places and of being a scientist. I went to college at a time when women did not enter the field of Geophysics, but I did. I had professors tell me I needed to go home and have and tend to children. As a result I studied harder, graduated the top of my class and went on to graduate school. I became the best female Geophysicist in the business. I did not do it for attention, I did it for my need of knowledge and understanding of the physical world. I never wanted to be considered any man's equal, because I generally think far above them. Eventually I won the respect from the men I worked with. I am still a "traditional feminine female".

Why can people not accept that women like men can be traditional and strong. Educated but still caring. No one should be branded into a "role". All people should simply follow their passions.

[enfoldedblue]

In a recent BQH hypnosis session my client saw that he held the male warrior archetype at his core. In the expanded state he could see how this affected his reality. He said it was like a filter that through which his energy flowed out into the world. Having the warrior there meant that he created a reality that was focused on battles.

He declared that it was time for the warrior to retire. I asked what the warrior would become if he retired from creating and engaging in battle. The teacher, the healer and the architect was his answer.

[Bill Ryan]

I don't want attention. For as long as I can remember I wanted to be a scientist. I had a neighbor who let me read their National Geographic. I dreamed of traveling to exotic places and of being a scientist. I went to college at a time when women did not enter the field of Geophysics, but I did. I had professors tell me I needed to go home and have and tend to children. As a result I studied harder, graduated the top of my class and went on to graduate school. I became the best female Geophysicist in the business. I did not do it for attention, I did it for my need of knowledge and understanding of the physical world. I never wanted to be considered any man's equal, because I generally think far above them. Eventually I won the respect from the men I worked with. I am still a "traditional feminine female".

Why can people not accept that women like men can be traditional and strong. Educated but still caring. No one should be branded into a "role". All people should simply follow their passions.

Amen to that! :sun:

I'd like to draw attention to this video, which is an anonymous whistleblowing report by a woman working at Sandia Labs. The long email is read aloud and shown onscreen, but @Geophyz, you may find this as riveting as I did. It made me extremely angry, something which is quite rare.

This stuff is poison. It's how "Affirmative Action" (e.g. promoting minorities or women to positions in organizations because of their color or gender and not because of ability), is demeaning, undermining, and itself offensively prejudiced.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZT4xkXZVAI

[greybeard]

We are born equal with different abilities but it is up to us to find what we excel at and to develop latent ability.
Any modern equivalent of jobs for the boys is not productive, there is no such thing as a free lunch.
I was brought up on a rewards for effort system and while that too has flaws --its not dependent on anything other than your work ethic.
Your gender should not make the slightest difference.
Chris

[Karen (Geophyz)]

I am incensed! You are correct that this is POISON! Women and minorities have worked hard to be promoted and treated with respect because they capable and educated and excellent at their jobs. This is setting all these advances backward. This culture is not good and is not helping anyone or any problems we have in this country.

[Ernie Nemeth]

I am also outraged but not at all surprised because that is where this sort of minority/counter-racism must end up.

It is insanity to consider minority representation as a priority for anything other than a photo-op, and even there it is often reprehensible.

I am sure many have had run ins with this sort of ideology, it is not uncommon.

This is globalist think, and it is only the introductory phase where the controllers advocate an agenda that reduces the populace and its institutions to the least common denominator, thereby diluting the capacity of the system to respond with alacrity and purpose. The controllers care not a whit about minority representation, but it is a great divisive strategy.

There is absolutely no way, not one chance in a billion, no matter the cost, that I would ever apologize for my whiteness or for my fellow majority of white citizens. But then again I think for myself, always have.

[Anka]

It is a far too broad subject, but I think against all the research investigated by leading paleontologists, ethnologists, psychologists, neurosciences and biologists, and against today's confusion over behavior, between equal and identical, the supremacy of today's social form seems to lead wrongly but successfully.
We all know that we are not identical, and no one can deny biological inheritance, and apart from all currents of feminism, relationships, family, education of future generations, gender or other wrongly mentioned developed terms "cultures", no matter, we are still human beings.:flower:

Once upon a time women and men lived and worked in harmony, survival was more difficult but relationships were simpler.
-the man ventures daily in a hunt, in seemingly hostile conditions, risking everything to bring food to the woman and children, defending his family from enemies.
He did not then, have to "analyze the relationship" or take out the trash and help spread the sheets on the bed:)
-the woman's tasks were just as clear, her successes were measured in relation to the responsibilities of maintaining an orderly and normal family life, then each appreciated the other's efforts.

As my own experience, I always understood very well the human side of each party.
I worked in a team with 13 "men" in a multinational company and I understood how fascinating is the basis of their philosophy of life, not complex, just very sincere short and to the point.
For example, one of them said to me, "God ... I'm crazy about beautiful women!"
And I told him that what is beautiful even God likes! I am a woman and I can say out loud that even I, like beautiful women! I usually look at their smile and the sincere gleam in their eyes. :heart: Why can't I love beauty? And I even saw extremely beautiful women in the world, with smiles so clear and real that I would have smiled too, just looking at them:)
I am talking about purely genuine beauty in the gentleness of goodness that can be felt more in the aspect of beauty.

A friend said, "Hey, I ordered a glass of water when I was on a plane with a flight attendant, and she looked at me as if I'd ordered this for her. So I reformulated with the necessary intonation of the voice, that I would like a glass of water because I'm really thirsty, inducing the feeling in my voice that I know the fact is... this is her choice in life and not her profession to bring me a glass of water ... ".. In what a world we live in ... and it's still very seriously comic.

Under the pretext of the uncertainty of the role of men and the place of women in society, there are billions of differences and similarities, the difference in values ​​between women and men increases in terms of ego forming new uncertain horizons, among reasons, mistakes, labels and reinterpretations, and in the current version,
...if we ask ourselves why men watch football and women in the mirror, I think there are quite a few extremes for one truth, that regardless of social conditioning if women are women or men are men, we are from the same core :heart:
An extreme (for me) that comes to my mind now, not necessarily as an example of something, it's just that:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albanian_sworn_virgins

otherwise ... I'm just a girl :)

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse4.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.Z5Ufk_CRy1FsiaNZlDyRRgHaJ4%26pid%3DApi&f=1

[Lunesoleil]

ZH6tDkHbUus
Don't know if the English version has already been shared in this discussion ?, I know its French version

👩‍❤️‍💋‍👨 💕 🎭 🍹🍸🌞🌝 👕👗

[Brigantia]

Now they're coming after Gandalf, why can't they leave classic tales alone? As if Galadriel is not a force to be reckoned with...

Gary Buechler makes some good points here and as a woman I say that they should leave LOTR alone, and let it stand as the classic of literature that it is.

eIC6L0aBLr0

[Vicus]

Now they're coming after Gandalf, why can't they leave classic tales alone? As if Galadriel is not a force to be reckoned with...

Gary Buechler makes some good points here and as a woman I say that they should leave LOTR alone, and let it stand as the classic of literature that it is.

eIC6L0aBLr0

they want a female James Bond too...don't worry, daughter of Bond producer(Broccoli) say: no way.

I wonder why women can´t create her own version heroines and villains...
I only can recall Frankenstein (a monster man, hum..) from Mary Shelby.
Power hungry fourth wave Feminismus (feminazis) just want owner every male endeavor just per se.
If we are equal in everything...(we are not, and certain not in front justice...)
for starters ;females are like OS Windows and males like OS Linux.
our interface is sex.
Where is female imagination? :o

[Mashika]

..................

[Billy Vasiliadis]

While I know this doesn't probably count for much, I'm really very sorry to hear about what happened to you Mashika :flower:

[Ewan]

Let me tell you a bit of a story about that stuff

Back when i was 8 or so, i was on catholic school. One day, because i liked basketball very much, i went to school very early to practice, while no one was around. The retarded idiot who was on charge of cleaning met me at the courtyard, and he talked to me for a while and even played with me for a bit. Then, when no one was around, he pushed me to the garden and pulled my shorts off, and tried to rape me, but a nun saw it and ran and stopped him. That one thing, turned me into something else, i thought "if i was a boy" this would have never happened to me, and it remained on my head for years. So i turned into " a boy", violent and disrespectful and strong and unable to feel compassion for weak people among lots of other things. I was destroyed and separated from what you think being "feminine" is, totally

I grew to hate most people, everyone always looks for something they can get out of you. So why can't woman be "feminine"? who knows! Maybe something happened that caused them to not be up to the "feminism" standard everyone expects

But i do know one thing, if a guy, or some other woman, tries to take advantage of me, their head will travel space faster than the speed of light, and then land on my fist

So yeah, i'm sorry women are not feminine enough these days.. *It's not required to fulfill* a womannes requirement, Lots of girls go through that abuse without ever saying anything, then become violent later on, or go into drugs, so excuse me but "When men were men & women were feminine" it only reminds me of some fat assole taking my shorts off, touching my breast and trying to insert his p*enis on me, when i was 8 years old. I can still feel his dirty hands and breath all over me. So f*ck that idea that idealizes gender behaviors

I went home and went into my mom's room, and picked up a gun, and thought "i'm going to shoot him tomorrow", i was in bestial mode, i could not care less about life or anything, i felt rapped and hurt badly, and stupid for thinking i was safe. I thought "if i was a boy, this would have not happened" over and over and eventually i did became just like that, and people feared me, and avoided me, and i eat it all up because i was unable to talk to anyone at home, i was on my own.



The women made the house a home.
Men provided the finance as best they could and fixed things.
Men took of their hats as a salute to women --got up of their seats--opened doors.

So for me, that stuff means nothing at all

I took it to myself to never be seen weak or "feminine" or whatever that means, and it was all done as i wished, far more beyond that anyone thought it could go. And that's why i'm the way i am. So yeah, women do not belong to any category, neither do man, let everyone be whatever they want to be, i could not care less about social standards around what a gender must be. Boys are afraid of me after they understand they won't be able to lead a life, but instead will be following behind.. lol

I have broken so many hearts, it makes me laugh, not because i enjoy, but because they come with expectations that even after i tell them i can't fulfill, they still almost demand to be given a chance, and once they find out who i am, they retreat in ridiculous ways. It could almost be said they become "feminine" at that point lmao! Unable to stand against me, feeling afraid of losing it and becoming the weak one on the relationship, so they run away soon after, and never call back.

To me, that's amusing, since i barely interested anyways, but to them it's like the end of the world. I'm a monster lol, but yeah i never do this on purpose, they get damaged on their own, because i always say "i won't be able to be what you want or wish" and they all think they can change me :) :P

I'm sorry that happened to you Mashika, truly.

At the risk of meeting your fist at the speed of light, :flower: You are treating everyone you meet in this world as if they were that man - I think you already know this deep down. :flower: :flower:

Please forgive me. :heart:

[Karen (Geophyz)]

Gosh Mashika, I am so sorry that happened to you. One day I hope you are able to let go of the anger for that one horrid person who entered your life. Then you will be able to open your heart to a man who will truly love you and you will be able to love. Now it may seem that all men are evil but they are not and the right man will NOT want to change you.

[Mashika]

I'm truly sorry i became upset like that, i always promise myself it won't happen again but it always does at some point

I understand not everyone is the same, but i guess what i can say as far as why things are different today, is that after years of constant abuse or living in a society where every guy is just trying to take advantage in one way or another, people tend to become like that, more self reliant and less interested in a relationship or life like previous generations had

Most of my friends have gone through some form of abuse in their lives, i have heard terrible stories of abuse by uncles, cousins and so on. The perception of depending on someone else is not much valid these days, people distrust and feel you can only trust or rely on yourself, so we may be more independent and removed that part of "guys work and girls stay home"

I want to be with someone who can be equal, and not someone who tells me how or what to do. It actually bothers me when someone tries to tell me how to be or what to change, as if i have to fit his views or needs. If the person finds me inadequate as i am, then why try in the first place? It just makes me feel they face and body is all they needed, and they want to throw away the rest and replace it with something they value more than my actual personality

[Billy Vasiliadis]

I see nothing wrong with wanting a relationship where you are seen as an intellectual and spiritual equal Mashika.  In fact, I would argue settling for anything less is a recipe for relationship breakdown and heartache.

Tying this back to the main topic, I can see why some would be irritated with the idea of traditional gender roles, especially if they have been on the receiving end of abuse or ill-treatment within such a system.  I have experienced and seen it myself. I'm sure most everyone has.  Seeking to remove such constraints so that individuals can live authentic lives is a worthy thing to do imo.  Freedom is vital for health and happiness.

Yet, I also understand some of the pushback.  I don't think traditions are all bad or that we should dispense with all of it as though it were some experiment gone awry with nothing redeeming.  My sense is that the male female polarity is something sacred and powerful, something worth preserving.  You see this polarity throughout nature.  That to me suggests there is something of significance in it.  Deleting all of that, or saying that these things are simply constructs that can be redefined at will, just doesn't sit right with me.

Men and women are clearly equals, but I don't think they are identical.  Instead of framing them as opposites, perhaps we can see them as complements?  The same way peanut butter and jam, or hot chocolate and a winter night, complement each other.  They are better together.

Is there a happy middle ground where we can honour the male female polarity, while also allowing people the freedom to be their unique selves?

I have thought for a little while now that the best is yet to come for male female relationships.  The flowering is yet to have happened, except for perhaps in isolated instances. How do we get there as a species? Need it be this hard?

Yes, what I have written is probably an oversimplification and leaves out a great deal.  This is definitely something I want to understand in greater depth.

[Mashika]

I see nothing wrong with wanting a relationship where you are seen as an intellectual and spiritual equal Mashika.  In fact, I would argue settling for anything less is a recipe for relationship breakdown and heartache.

Tying this back to the main topic, I can see why some would be irritated with the idea of traditional gender roles, especially if they have been on the receiving end of abuse or ill-treatment within such a system.  I have experienced and seen it myself. I'm sure most everyone has.  Seeking to remove such constraints so that individuals can live authentic lives is a worthy thing to do imo.  Freedom is vital for health and happiness.

Yet, I also understand some of the pushback.  I don't think traditions are all bad or that we should dispense with all of it as though it were some experiment gone awry with nothing redeeming.  My sense is that the male female polarity is something sacred and powerful, something worth preserving.  You see this polarity throughout nature.  That to me suggests there is something of significance in it.  Deleting all of that, or saying that these things are simply constructs that can be redefined at will, just doesn't sit right with me.

Men and women are clearly equals, but I don't think they are identical.  Instead of framing them as opposites, perhaps we can see them as complements?  The same way peanut butter and jam, or hot chocolate and a winter night, complement each other.  They are better together.

Is there a happy middle ground where we can honour the male female polarity, while also allowing people the freedom to be their unique selves?

I have thought for a little while now that the best is yet to come for male female relationships.  The flowering is yet to have happened, except for perhaps in isolated instances. How do we get there as a species? Need it be this hard?

Yes, what I have written is probably an oversimplification and leaves out a great deal.  This is definitely something I want to understand in greater depth.

I think one of the problems is this, right since childhood we are told a set of rules about how to protect ourselves, like :

- Don't talk to strangers
- Don't accept help from strangers
- If someone gets too close, move away from that person
- Be full alert while on the street
- If someone is around for a long while, and looking at you, be alert if they try to suddenly approach

And plenty others, so for example if i'm standing there and some guy suddenly comes and tries to talk to me, i feel alert and don't immediately reply, if i go shopping and someone offers to help me carry my bags back to my car, i suspect they may be trying to still them from me. If someone offers to go with me or a ride home, i decline, i don't want to show on the news or in a missing person list. If i'm at at the movies waiting for a friend and some guy is around constantly looking at me, i don't think "he likes me", i think first "i'm being watched, could be someone suspicious"

There are things that happen all the time, for example if you are standing there waiting for someone, and some random guy comes close and ask if you have the time, the last thing you must do is take out your cell phone to check, because it will get stolen. If you go to a bar and have some drinks, the last thing you must do is accept a ride from someone who was at the bar but not originally with you

Plenty of stuff like that. We are always told to be independent, to be self sufficient and to be in control of any situation, that makes it very hard for a man to be 'the man' on the relationship, as it used to be years ago

Another thing i noticed is that lots of guys don't like girls that earn more than them, and i can see that in the way i was invited on dates when i was in school, and i would show up on my own car and it was a better car than they had, i could immediately sense they were a bit embarrassed i was doing better. Or if we went to get dinner and i wanted some wine and got an expensive one, and i always pay for my own stuff so they felt i was unreachable, they had to pay for both of us, as it's the custom, but i really did not mind going to eat somewhere else, and not to the very expensive place they could not really afford, trying to impress me and finding out they could not pay was an humiliation somehow.

"The man has to provide" is that part, but i just don't see how that can work, it means i have to look for someone with more status than me, so things work the classic way? I would rather go eat tacos on a stand on any street corner and spend 10 dollars, than go to a very expensive restaurant just because they want to impress and then feel them die inside when the check is for 200 dollars and they can't afford it and i have to lend them money. All their pride gone in 5 minutes, just because wanting to follow traditional roles?

I don't get it, but i guess we live on different worlds now :(

[Mashika]

One of the best vacations i have ever had, was going to the beach with a friend who used to sell stuff on the street to pay for school. He knew i was doing great but he never cared or tried to show off or anything like feeling 'less', he simply said, "let's go to the beach", and had backpacks and went by bus, then slept on the beach, and eat on cheap places, and walked to other places instead of taking a taxi, we each paid for our own stuff and spent very little. There was nothing but good times even while sleeping on the beach, with a thousand mosquitoes zooming all over the place.

And we were just equal, no enforced roles or anything like that, then we went back on bus and the last part of the trip we walked and asked for a ride, and got back into the city on the back of a truck. Not because we could not pay for the bus, but because we just thought about doing that at the last moment.

What a great time, no roles played or anything, just have fun and go through life doing whatever you want and can. I wish it was more like that but most times other people always try to take control or be on top, and they can't handle it otherwise

:cocktail:

[Vicus]

I see nothing wrong with wanting a relationship where you are seen as an intellectual and spiritual equal Mashika.  In fact, I would argue settling for anything less is a recipe for relationship breakdown and heartache.

Tying this back to the main topic, I can see why some would be irritated with the idea of traditional gender roles, especially if they have been on the receiving end of abuse or ill-treatment within such a system.  I have experienced and seen it myself. I'm sure most everyone has.  Seeking to remove such constraints so that individuals can live authentic lives is a worthy thing to do imo.  Freedom is vital for health and happiness.

Yet, I also understand some of the pushback.  I don't think traditions are all bad or that we should dispense with all of it as though it were some experiment gone awry with nothing redeeming.  My sense is that the male female polarity is something sacred and powerful, something worth preserving.  You see this polarity throughout nature.  That to me suggests there is something of significance in it.  Deleting all of that, or saying that these things are simply constructs that can be redefined at will, just doesn't sit right with me.

Men and women are clearly equals, but I don't think they are identical.  Instead of framing them as opposites, perhaps we can see them as complements?  The same way peanut butter and jam, or hot chocolate and a winter night, complement each other.  They are better together.

Is there a happy middle ground where we can honour the male female polarity, while also allowing people the freedom to be their unique selves?

I have thought for a little while now that the best is yet to come for male female relationships.  The flowering is yet to have happened, except for perhaps in isolated instances. How do we get there as a species? Need it be this hard?

Yes, what I have written is probably an oversimplification and leaves out a great deal.  This is definitely something I want to understand in greater depth.



"I have thought for a little while now that the best is yet to come for male female relationships. The flowering is yet to have happened, except for perhaps in isolated instances. How do we get there as a species? Need it be this hard?"

meanwhile, from horse mouth...:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_5quJu_QcE

[gnostic9]

I watched this earlier from a link in my email. Very moving and emotional. The email was from Josh Del Sol the guy who made the "Take Back Your Power" film. I believe that this conversation about masculinity is vital in the time we are experiencing now, Please watch.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=meVm9jeYLjY


Love peace and joy to all!

[ExomatrixTV]

Jordan Peterson on the 'backlash against masculinity' - BBC News:

ShS4uEY2Jw8


Jordan Peterson talks MASCULINITY with Russell Brand:

5E26ztUXkaE


Jordan B Peterson on masculinity and the plight of young men | BBC Sounds:

MRjp1-DgMuA


Jordan Peterson: Toxic Masculinity - A 12 Rules for Life Lecture:

bNqVSSX1vRE

[Mike]

It's important in these types of discussions that equality isn't conflated with sameness.

Equality, to me - in the context of a relationship between the sexes - means that there's no disparity in respect being offered. But men and women are different - thousands of years of evolution are burnt into our DNA. Men have been providers and protectors since forever. It's in their biology.

Nature is intelligent. Our ancestors didn't get it wrong for thousands of years. They weren't assigning roles arbitrarily. Biology often dictated that men did this and women did that. Now, in 2021, it's different obviously, for all sorts of reasons, because women can perform many of the jobs men currently do. But that doesn't mean that all that ancestral behavior, burnt into the DNA of men and women, will suddenly cease to exist. So we're in the middle of a rocky adjustment period.

But regardless of what the current paradigm yields, there will still be roles that men are more suited for, and vice versa. This mania for "equality" disregards our inherent nature and can cause all sorts of damage.

I once lived with this woman, in my mid 20's. She did little more than putter around the apartment we shared. I went to work, bought the food, paid the bills etc. It got especially annoying after a year or so. But I kept doing it. I took care of her.

One day she suggested I stop and write the screenplay I'd been meaning to write. She'd go to work, she said, and support us while I wrote. I couldn't believe it. But sure enough, she got a job and I quit mine, and I began writing. I was thrilled on the one hand, but something about it felt off. I just couldn't articulate it.

Within weeks, her attitude towards me changed. It was all in the eyes. She resented me. She insisted she didn't, but it was obvious. It didn't even matter that I was still buying my own food and so on; it didn't matter that I'd taken care of her for well over a year - she never worked a day or lifted a finger during that time, but just a few weeks in of this role reversal and she was already snappy and moody and bitter. That's all it took! She'd conveniently forgotten all the sweat and toil and effort that I'd put in so she could sit around and smoke cigarettes all day for the last year plus

But I'd expected it. It was simply the acting out of the uneasy feeling I had before it all began. Even though I wasn't working, and was doing what I loved, I never felt comfortable doing it. I felt guilty somehow, even though I kept reminding myself that I was the one who had been carrying her for the last year or so. It never quieted my conscience. And she never got used to her role either.

It's because these things are built into the biology. A woman, over time, will stop respecting a man who stays at home. I've seen this happen many, many times. Even if the man staying at home is something they both agreed on! Even if the man had done years of heavy lifting prior for the both of them. That situation fails far more often than it works. And a woman cannot love you if she doesn't respect you. It's that simple.

Imagine this: a robber breaks into the house. the couple sits up in bed and the man says, "here's the baseball bat, go get him! let me know when the coast is clear and I'll come out!" How much equality do women really want exactly? It stops at the scenario above, surely. But where does it begin and where does it stop, exactly? These are things we're still in the process of defining, and it's quite confusing for everyone.

[Mashika]

Imagine this: a robber breaks into the house. the couple sits up in bed and the man says, "here's the baseball bat, go get him! let me know when the coast is clear and I'll come out!" How much equality do women really want exactly? It stops at the scenario above, surely. But where does it begin and where does it stop, exactly? These are things we're still in the process of defining, and it's quite confusing for everyone.

That's why i have a .38 Super, and a couple AK-47, that i know how to use way better than most guys i have ever met. In fact, some of them when learning i had very high military training, didn't felt like pursuing the relationship anymore. It does look like they ran scared with their tails between their legs, somehow :P

Apparently being unable to be in control of the situation, is a no go for a lot of guys, which to me, just means they were weak to begin with, and they just expected to 'own' and not to stand equal, they wanted to "show me" to their friends? lol

And by standing equal i mean, let me do whatever i want, and if i do and then fail, then i wasn't strong enough, but it was 'my choice' to try, i'll deal with the failure and if the guy is good enough, he will be with me through that. If i fail at something, and the guy immediately thinks, "it's because she's a woman" then he's just crap. And the other way around too

I don't need anyone to 'protect' me, specially if in the end i may be one who actually has the power to protect our family

[Mashika]

If you have ever shot a Yugo AK-47 in full open mode (meaning you select the "all the ammo will go out as long as you don't let go of the trigger) then you know the barrel may burn and waste the rifle forever. I have some friends invited long ago to try one of the cheap rifles we had, for training. They shot a couple rounds, they closed their eyes while shooting. then i picked one and put on a full show, with around 30 or more shots in sequence, they kept jumping and closing their eyes like little girls.. LMFAO! I don't think man are all they think they are, and if you can't handle the sound of a barrage of rounds, are you man enough to handle areal woman? lol

That's how i see things, and i'm pretty sure even people like Gal Gadot, the "Wonder Woman" actress from Israel, thinks the same, because she went though the army training as well before going into acting. Our world is not the same anymore, and in Russia, it never was, Women fought along with men, out there on the field, in between all the carnage. We do indeed live in very different worlds <3

*There are boys, and there are man* Boys want to be in control, man understand that things work in a different way, and they don't want to control, they want to experience life along with a woman they can respect, and who can take over, if and when needed. That's all i know

[thepainterdoug]

Mashi

you made me think of Herman Melville/

This whole act's immutably decreed. 'Twas rehearsed by thee and me a billion years before this ocean rolled. Fool! I am the Fates' lieutenant; I act under orders.
Herman Melville, Moby Dick

we are still doing this dance, as old as the hills. its the game we were given and we have only given it a theme and variations treatment since. Each generation thinking its new and has some liberating angle and insight, but yet ends up all the same

i dont see any way out, and even if there were, who says it would be any better?

[Mike]

Masha I would be one of those little boys quivering with that AK lol! I've never shot a gun before. I'd like to. I should probably start with something smaller first:)

Typically, men date laterally and down in the heirarchy. While women date laterally and up. Women, in general, want someone just as successful but usually more successful and competent, and men in general want someone less successful and less competent.

I make no judgement on this. There are all sorts of reasons for it, and we can get into them if you want. I'm not suggesting men are better or smarter and so on. This is just what the social sciences tell us. And it's pretty consistent with my observations.

I think there is a difference between a man that is a control freak and a man that is a provider/protector. You don't need any protecting perhaps, but I also think you are somewhat unique. I don't think you fit the mold of the typical woman that is looking up the heirarchy for someone more successful or competent. You are looking laterally, for an equal. So you might, according to social scientists, have a little more difficulty meeting someone because the typical man may be intimidated by you.

Here's a question for you. I'm very curious how you'll answer this. Exactly how equal would you like your relationship to be? What if this hypothetical man was just as handy with an AK as you? And what if that robber arrived? And what if this man said, "you take care of it." Would you lose respect for that man? What if that same man asssumed a role more traditionally held by women, and stayed home while you went out into the world and earned a living? Would you lose respect for him? I know you don't *need* someone to protect and provide for you, but would you prefer a man assume that role at least some of the time? And how would that effect your feeling toward him?

[Mashika]

Masha I would be one of those little boys quivering with that AK lol! I've never shot a gun before. I'd like to. I should probably start with something smaller first:)

Typically, men date laterally and down in the heirarchy. While women date laterally and up. Women, in general, want someone just as successful but usually more successful and competent, and men in general want someone less successful and less competent.

I make no judgement on this. There are all sorts of reasons for it, and we can get into them if you want. I'm not suggesting men are better or smarter and so on. This is just what the social sciences tell us. And it's pretty consistent with my observations.

I think there is a difference between a man that is a control freak and a man that is a provider/protector. You don't need any protecting perhaps, but I also think you are somewhat unique. I don't think you fit the mold of the typical woman that is looking up the heirarchy for someone more successful or competent. You are looking laterally, for an equal. So you might, according to social scientists, have a little more difficulty meeting someone because the typical man may be intimidated by you.

Here's a question for you. I'm very curious how you'll answer this. Exactly how equal would you like your relationship to be? What if this hypothetical man was just as handy with an AK as you? And what if that robber arrived? And what if this man said, "you take care of it." Would you lose respect for that man? What if that same man asssumed a role more traditionally held by women, and stayed home while you went out into the world and earned a living? Would you lose respect for him? I know you don't *need* someone to protect and provide for you, but would you prefer a man assume that role at least some of the time? And how would that effect your feeling toward him?

IF it gets to that, i will do two things, if i was the one person inside the house while the robber comes, i will pick up at least 2 guns, go out in a rampage taking the feet fingers of the guy, then hand the second gun to my husband or bf. Then we would take care of it. Because he will know what to do

If i was the one outside, i would expect the same from him, and then i would be handed a gun, i would trust blindly in his actions. Then "we would take care of the issue"

What i expect is this, IF something happens, and i die, i expect him to take care of himself to the best he can, and if we had kids, i expect he will be strong enough to bring them up to our standards, without me.

And if something happens, and he dies, or falls down, i will do exactly the same, regardless of the situation, I'll find a way, and will not fall down into "ohh poor of me, if only i had someone to support us" situation. That's preposterous lol. I'll figure it out, one way or another



What if that same man asssumed a role more traditionally held by women, and stayed home while you went out into the world and earned a livin

I would expect him to raise exceptional children, because obviously i noticed something in him i liked so much, that i could not help being with him and raise a family. So i would expect him to be "that person" that excels just like that

If someone needs to worry or be in a position of protecting someone else, instead of "knowing" who the other person is, and don't feel insecure about their relationship. Then i see weakness

My role model, as far as man are, is someone who 'knows' that the person they married or live with, is capable enough to deal with anything on their own, and this guy is self aware and secure enough of his feelings and trust, that he knows absolutely nothing, will break the relationship apart, ever, regardless of who is 'in control' at any time. Like going to another country or being away for a couple years, but knowing everything back home is perfectly fine, because that person back there, is capable enough, on their own. That's how i learned man, or woman should be, at all times

[Mashika]

Masha I would be one of those little boys quivering with that AK lol! I've never shot a gun before. I'd like to. I should probably start with something smaller first:)

Typically, men date laterally and down in the heirarchy. While women date laterally and up. Women, in general, want someone just as successful but usually more successful and competent, and men in general want someone less successful and less competent.

I make no judgement on this. There are all sorts of reasons for it, and we can get into them if you want. I'm not suggesting men are better or smarter and so on. This is just what the social sciences tell us. And it's pretty consistent with my observations.

I think there is a difference between a man that is a control freak and a man that is a provider/protector. You don't need any protecting perhaps, but I also think you are somewhat unique. I don't think you fit the mold of the typical woman that is looking up the heirarchy for someone more successful or competent. You are looking laterally, for an equal. So you might, according to social scientists, have a little more difficulty meeting someone because the typical man may be intimidated by you.

Here's a question for you. I'm very curious how you'll answer this. Exactly how equal would you like your relationship to be? What if this hypothetical man was just as handy with an AK as you? And what if that robber arrived? And what if this man said, "you take care of it." Would you lose respect for that man? What if that same man asssumed a role more traditionally held by women, and stayed home while you went out into the world and earned a living? Would you lose respect for him? I know you don't *need* someone to protect and provide for you, but would you prefer a man assume that role at least some of the time? And how would that effect your feeling toward him?

But i do agree with something, my life experience and situation, is not exactly the same one as most girls. I do happen to have a very different life experience, due to 'reasons' i could never even begin to explain now, or ever maybe :/

But it's no only me, try to befriend other Russian girls, and you'll see how similar some things are. Except for the fact at lot of them expect guys to pay for everything *while still dating*, but even after that, they still expect to completely be independent for everything else in daily life :)

[Mashika]

I just realized something, maybe i'm thinking of this entire thing completely from my own point of view, without regard from western ideals. In which case i apologize, i'm stepping on your culture ideals without any regard, and assuming you are wrong. Which is wrong approach in so many levels :(

But maybe this may explain why i sound the way i do right now....

Have you ever considered, why Russia, is thought of as "The Motherland", and not "The Fatherland"? :) :D

There are around 3 reasons for it, but a big one, in modern times, is that current Russia was basically built on the top of Russian women, after most men died in WW2. There are other reasons as well like "the land that we were born from" and so on, but most people don't/would not get it much unless they have met a Babushka from the old times, then they would see how little need they had, or learned to have, for "protection" of any sorts or ways :)

[Strat]

they still expect to completely be independent for everything else in daily life :)

I don't mean to interrupt yalls discussion, it's interesting. But something I always thought was fascinating from a cultural standpoint is there was a book written in the 90s, in the US, called "Millionaire Next Door." It was basically a survey of what millionaires across the US look like and a large percentage of them were Russian immigrant gals. I have the book and I'll look into it later. I think the salient point of the book was that most millionaires lived middle class lives and saved their cash rather than buying expensive houses and nice cars.

Oh and yes that damn AK gets really hot! Even semi auto (I never shot full auto). And the shell ejects really far. I think the M4 is better but I love/prefer the AK more because of the reliability. You can break it down in like 2 seconds. But hey, another thread for another day.

[Mashika]

they still expect to completely be independent for everything else in daily life :)

I don't mean to interrupt yalls discussion, it's interesting. But something I always thought was fascinating from a cultural standpoint is there was a book written in the 90s, in the US, called "Millionaire Next Door." It was basically a survey of what millionaires across the US look like and a large percentage of them were Russian immigrant gals. I have the book and I'll look into it later. I think the salient point of the book was that most millionaires lived middle class lives and saved their cash rather than buying expensive houses and nice cars.

Oh and yes that damn AK gets really hot! Even semi auto (I never shot full auto). And the shell ejects really far. I think the M4 is better but I love/prefer the AK more because of the reliability. You can break it down in like 2 seconds. But hey, another thread for another day.

Yes lol, the full auto is considered a "kid" switch, for when you want to feel you are in a movie, but it does show how strong you are really, in terms of how much can you take of 'reality', even if the gun will die. It was a cheap one anyways, for training so if it dies then "it dies". It was a mistake for Yugoslavia to create those monsterous full auto guns. But like you said, that's a topic for another thread..

I will have to look at that book, i don't remember ever hearing about it. Is that current Russia or the one from back in the USSR republics?

Is that book about the "New Russians" or what US people now call "Oligarks" or something?

[Strat]

Is that current Russia or the one from back in the USSR republics?

I'm a moron so I can't give you a definitive answer but my guess is USSR. I'd actually put money on it... Not a lot though.

[Mashika]

Is that current Russia or the one from back in the USSR republics?

I'm a moron so I can't give you a definitive answer but my guess is USSR. I'd actually put money on it... Not a lot though.

"Is that book about the "New Russians" or what US people now call "Oligarks" or something?"

I bet you already figured out which category i belong to :P So i'm going to shamelessly 'a moron' myself :P

[Strat]

Oh, the book wasn't necessarily about Russians at all. It was just a survey of what the average millionaire in America looks like, how they live, spend their money, etc. They also looked at immigrants who achieved a high level of wealth and (for whatever reason) Russian gals consistently accumulated wealth. I may be butchering it, I haven't read this book since I was young. But as I said, I'll look it up.

It definitely wasn't referring to Oligarks. Just average people who achieved high wealth.

[Mike]

I once worked with a Russian woman named Vera. One day she saw me reading 'The Gulag Archipelago' during a break and we had a little chat about it. We became friends. She spoke of her daughter often..and one day, in her thick Russian accent, she said, "Would you like meet my daughter?" I said, "sure", and never really gave it a thought after that.

Well, maybe a month later here comes this young woman, widely grinning, approaching me as I was leaving work. She explained in broken English that she was Vera's daughter, and said little else. But even in the silence between us, I sensed some kind of expectation from her. She was sort of looking at me like, "well, what now?"

And then I dimly recalled Vera asking me if I wanted to meet her daughter about a month prior, and my stomach sank. This was obviously her way of trying to create a romantic connection between us. I was naive. I didn't make that connection at the time.

So this woman, named Anna, followed me to my car and just got in! "My Mom send me picture of you when I in Russia. You very handsome!" she told me. "She say you want meet me."

At that moment, I realised that my agreeing to meet her meant about 10 different things in Russian, apparently:) It meant that I was supposed to entertain her for the 2 weeks she was in America, for starters. But it also meant, I quickly discovered, that I was expected to act as tour guide and pay for every last little thing. But that wasn't it. There's more..

The whole point of her coming to America was to not only meet me and let me entertain her for 2 weeks..it was to marry her so she could get into the country LOL. She was very open about this by the way. She acted as though herself and Vera and I had spent hours discussing it, that I'd happily agreed and that a ring would be arriving shortly. She made it all sound as simple and easy as a walk in the park. How Vera got all this from me merely agreeing to meet her daughter was beyond me. All I said was "sure", and then suddenly I was confronted by this grinning Russian woman and thrust into this arranged marriage plan of which I had absolutely no previous knowledge of.

But the funniest part of all this was her attitude, which was: you have to earn me buddy! You have to woo me and impress me. Yes i want to come to America but first you must show me you're worthy if I'm going to marry you.

And I just couldn't convince her that I wasn't interested in marrying her LOL. I tried to explain, as politely as I could, that I didnt even particularly want to show her around and spend money I didn't have on her. She simply couldn't believe it. She was quite beautiful, and I suspect men had been tripping over themselves back in Russia to get in her good graces. And had the situation been a little different, I may have done the same. But it was all so bizarre and unexpected that I couldn't quite wrap my head around it.

Anyway, her and I are friends now and we still chat sometimes. She found her American guy and married him eventually. Worked out for everyone....except the guy, who she eventually left:)

[Mashika]

I once worked with a Russian woman named Vera. One day she saw me reading 'The Gulag Archipelago' during a break and we had a little chat about it. We became friends. She spoke of her daughter often..and one day, in her thick Russian accent, she said, "Would you like meet my daughter?" I said, "sure", and never really gave it a thought after that.

Well, maybe a month later here comes this young woman, widely grinning, approaching me as I was leaving work. She explained in broken English that she was Vera's daughter, and said little else. But even in the silence between us, I sensed some kind of expectation from her. She was sort of looking at me like, "well, what now?"

And then I dimly recalled Vera asking me if I wanted to meet her daughter about a month prior, and my stomach sank. This was obviously her way of trying to create a romantic connection between us. I was naive. I didn't make that connection at the time.

So this woman, named Anna, followed me to my car and just got in! "My Mom send me picture of you when I in Russia. You very handsome!" she told me. "She say you want meet me."

At that moment, I realised that my agreeing to meet her meant about 10 different things in Russian, apparently:) It meant that I was supposed to entertain her for the 2 weeks she was in America, for starters. But it also meant, I quickly discovered, that I was expected to act as tour guide and pay for every last little thing. But that wasn't it. There's more..

The whole point of her coming to America was to not only meet me and let me entertain her for 2 weeks..it was to marry her so she could get into the country LOL. She was very open about this by the way. She acted as though herself and Vera and I had spent hours discussing it, that I'd happily agreed and that a ring would be arriving shortly. She made it all sound as simple and easy as a walk in the park. How Vera got all this from me merely agreeing to meet her daughter was beyond me. All I said was "sure", and then suddenly I was confronted by this grinning Russian woman and thrust into this arranged marriage plan of which I had absolutely no previous knowledge of.

But the funniest part of all this was her attitude, which was: you have to earn me buddy! You have to woo me and impress me. Yes i want to come to America but first you must show me you're worthy if I'm going to marry you.

And I just couldn't convince her that I wasn't interested in marrying her LOL. I tried to explain, as politely as I could, that I didnt even particularly want to show her around and spend money I didn't have on her. She simply couldn't believe it. She was quite beautiful, and I suspect men had been tripping over themselves back in Russia to get in her good graces. And had the situation been a little different, I may have done the same. But it was all so bizarre and unexpected that I couldn't quite wrap my head around it.

Anyway, her and I are friends now and we still chat sometimes. She found her American guy and married him eventually. Worked out for everyone....except the guy, who she eventually left:)

Most girls are like that, but not in Russia, mostly on the Ukraine republic, "mail brides" they are called. I believe :)

In Russia, most guys are always treated hard, so that they show if they are capable or not, to be "the right one", in other old USSR republics, like Belorusia and/or Ukraine and such, girls are dumb in that "I want the guy to pay for me all the time" way, silly rabbits

[ExomatrixTV]

"Feminism vs Masculinity"

Most (if not all) Avalonians do not know how I really was raised ... as I never told anyone here ... that my mother was a very verrrry pro-active Dutch Feminist & Anti-War Activist being multiple times on national front page news papers, national radio & national tv shows in mid 1970s up to mid 1980s ... She even had her own radio shows in Amsterdam and published own news-paper dealing with Women & Gay Rights ... She was also one of the first in The Netherlands creating a network of parents schooling 3 & 4 years olds before they go to school officially and it was considered "very bad" by Christians at the time .... She was also co-founder of helping to shelter women who were abused & raped even within marriage!

My mother studied Psychology in University of Maastricht and I became like a "target" for some benevolent "experiments" ... I remember her asking me questions like "how do you feel" when I was 8 or 9 years old and my answer was: "my vocabulary is not big enough to express that sufficiently" ...

She also organized "Alternative Eastern" long weekend & "Alternative Christmas" long weekend by renting a big Farm in nature often with a big lake nearby with 2 other Feminists (Gonnie & Mirre) ... partial "camping" partial big sleeping places ... and placing a small advertisement in the big national (classical liberal) news papers asking if anyone is creative like playing music or organizing "scavenger hunt adventures" scouts for the kids ... and all ages were welcome.

So I met all kinds of creative people from all walks of life for years ... like some one who teaches yoga or some one who can play chess (https://lichess.org/@/Stop5Gdotnet) with me or some one who works in theater as an actor and prepares a group of voluntaries to join a play ... and I can go on and on of being immersed in diversity & meeting "weird" people having their own story to tell.


All of it shaped me who I am today.

Being raised like that and being a "Product of Feminism" has its downfalls and set-backs ... as for a long time "I had to be ashamed to be a man" and when I started be in my puberty phase ... I was not welcome anymore where my mother was active. Not all were like that but there were some "women only" events & protest marches where they took their children with them until some of the children became a "man" thus they debated if I was allowed to be there.

I remember my mother saying that most feminists are "anti-man" because of having multiple traumatic experiences with men ... and she tried to educate all of them that children have always the right to see his or her fathers and visa versa ... She found out many times how children are lied to by his or her mother about how evil their dads are ... yes it has some truth mixed with endless exaggerations & demonizing/misrepresentations where a child has no clue what to make of it. This problem of many divorced parents where children are used as pawns between wars is happening more than people realize and HOW that can effect somebody for the rest of your life. So she knew the flaws of feminism vs masculinity ... she was one of the very few that repeated many times fathers have rights too to see their children.

Emotionally I was confronted with all kinds of female victims of rape & abuse for couple years at young age that shaped me to be feeling guilty for being a man later on long time.

So many layers of behavior fused with guilt, shame, not understood, "being an outsider", anger towards a "masculine system" etc. etc.

The older I became to more I was aware of how psychological conditioning works in so many parts of how people act/operate and why ... and I literally "breathe psychology" meaning: for me it seems effortless to explore all possible psychological mechanisms ... not assuming I am right ...nor claiming to "know best" ... that is not what it is about ... it is about allowing yourself to see all perspectives/perceptions and having empathy enough NOT to judge too fast when some one behave in a certain weird way.


Should I write a book or make a video about: "how it is to be a son of a very pro-active Dutch Feminist activist and how I found my own path to a (healthy form of) masculinity?

cheers,
John Kuhles
August 9, 2021

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

The twisted concepts of wokeness get proven out when they become entangled and conflict with each other.

That's what seems to be happening here in the clip below. Boys are competing with girls at sports on account of inclusivity. But that is not a fair contest, as males are just built differently, and that's a biological reality.

Perhaps the official symbol for wokeness should be the Ouroboros: eventually it must consume itself, for it trapped itself in a corner here. Due to the need to pander to this inclusivity nonsense it was forced to facilitate ridiculous sporting match-ups, which can only end one way.

In a way this is a good thing, as it should serve as a very rude wake up call, particularly for women and girls - they are the victim of this. Don't forget, they are also under severe assault from the trans community, being called abhorrent things, like 'people who menstruate', and 'chest-feeders' (breast-feeding being deemed unacceptable and offensive to pregnant trans-women).

‘Absolutely outrageous’: All-male netball team beats girls in state tournament
YZ7KqX3hS7I

Women once fought for their rights and won. I feel (I fear) they may soon have to do so again, and fight against the very ideology (gone toxic and out of control) that once liberated them.

[Ernie Nemeth]

One of my fondest memories is when we got the great privilege of playing the senior girls basketball team. Our sophomore team was undefeated that year, with no one coming within 20 points of us. The team was so good I only managed to be the sixth man.

It was unheard of in those days. And it was not an official meeting. They said they could beat us, we told them they were welcome to try. They showed up at one of our unofficial practices at the local revamped old church. No adults...no referees. It was almost a free for all, really, and a whole lot of fun for us young boys...

We lost, but we were not really trying to win...we focused on our...um...man-to-man coverage as it were.

[Vicus]

Gender War


warning!!! this post is for hetero women/men !...


another colored birds find your own trees in the wood...



https://therationalmale.com/2019/01/16/gender-war/

[TargeT]

This topic is very multifaceted, but this angle of analysis is very interesting and makes a lot of sense to me.

RKh6N-sMBkA

[TargeT]

The assault on masculinity continues.


If you can understand scottish (I cant) there may be some colorful language... or just a lot of seizures captured on camera... not quite sure..
8IWluz53l34


But I think it's finally starting to fail.

[Gemma13]

The assault on masculinity continues.


If you can understand scottish (I cant) there may be some colorful language... or just a lot of seizures captured on camera... not quite sure..
8IWluz53l34


But I think it's finally starting to fail.

Thanks for that 8 minute belly laugh!

[TargeT]

I've got daughters... what are we doing to our young women, old women... all women?

iaMXq-hchp4

[TomKat]

I think it's The Seth Material where Seth points out that we humans artifically overemphasise the differences in the two sexes, that other species, such as cats and dogs, do not do that. It would be hard to argue against his logic on this point.

[TargeT]

I think it's The Seth Material where Seth points out that we humans artifically overemphasise the differences in the two sexes, that other species, such as cats and dogs, do not do that. It would be hard to argue against his logic on this point.

I would love to debate you on this as a 10 year multi animal rescue owner............. (please PLEASE tell me that a mare treats a stallion the same way... Please PLEASE tell me that a male sheep and a female has no difference.... ducks? mongoose? pigs?..... DOGS? I've bread South African BoerBoels for over 20 years....) your entire premise makes me terrified at the lack of experience you (and very probably most people) have.

I'd love to talk to you about this as a father of multiple home schooled kids, even my "tomboy" girls are clearly feminine and act accordingly when left to their own devices.....

I think you need to re-evaluate some base premises.

or at least, corral your opinions to things you have experienced personally.

I'd also love to talk to you about your apparent lack of experience with these two vectors...........

Please tell me, does emphasizing the differences in the sexes make for better life, better relationships or,,,,,,,, not?

Can my wife or daughter do the same physical things that I can do? Can I respond with the social eloquence/nuance/empathy that my female counterparts have skill sets in as effectively?

Nature has defined our roles, we are the ones who reject them.... and how is that working out so far? (seems to be very bad, from my observation).

[Gemma13]

Please tell me, does emphasizing the differences in the sexes make for better life, better relationships or,,,,,,,, not?

Can my wife or daughter do the same physical things that I can do? Can I respond with the social eloquence/nuance/empathy that my female counterparts have skill sets in as effectively?

Nature has defined our roles, we are the ones who reject them.... and how is that working out so far? (seems to be very bad, from my observation).

Good points TargeT.  It baffles me, (well maybe not sigh), why we can't keep emphasising the good traits of both sexes, work on developing the weaker points, and celebrate and encourage everyone to be both.

It doesn't fit the transgender dilemma of course and I really can't weigh in heavily as I don't experience what they do... or do I?

My masculine traits see me very happy to put on my steel caps, get down and dirty trapping and butchering wild bore, baiting, catching and filleting fish, lugging heavy objects, driving trucks and motorbikes, aggressively fighting to protect loved ones if needed, competing in all sports, lusting after alluring women, etc, etc.

My feminine traits see me very happy to put on a little black, red, or lacey white dress, gently caress loved ones, nurture and soothe forever, multitask, coordinate domesticity, dance, cry over little things, protect, crave a protective man who will romantically touch me every day, etc, etc.

My lists are severely lacking and way too simple of course, as I hastily wrote this, point being that both traits have incredible and beautiful strengths, as you highlighted.  So do we have to actually eliminate, or choose, one in favour of the other? Best of both worlds, and pivoting between these worlds, makes far more sense to me.

Transgendering seems like such a waste to me as I wouldn't be able to decide from one day to the next which sex I was going to perform strongly as.  But like I said, I can only form an opinion as I cannot experience the radical decision to biologically change sex instead of choosing to wear different clothes from one day to the next and do different things.

My simple self can't quite fathom that.  It would be far easier if we could just all call ourselves androgynous.  End of story.  Then we can pick and choose daily according to our whims... and we'd be able to free up some damn space in Wikipedia.

Sorry I got a bit off your points there I think.  But in relation to what was said in the vid you posted about some women wanting to demonstrate masculinity and strength and empowerment by taking sexually promiscuous to a whole new level because this somehow proves they can be sexually adventurous too...well that's one view I guess... pretty dumb in my book though and insulting to masculinity I would think. 

[TomKat]

I think it's The Seth Material where Seth points out that we humans artifically overemphasise the differences in the two sexes, that other species, such as cats and dogs, do not do that. It would be hard to argue against his logic on this point.

I would love to debate you on this

Obviously you would, too much so.
But the thread was about masculine vs feminine behaviour, and I don't particularly see that in animals. I've never seen a mare primping in front of a mirror and a stallion lifting weights.

[DSKlausler]

I think it's The Seth Material where Seth points out that we humans artifically overemphasise the differences in the two sexes, that other species, such as cats and dogs, do not do that. It would be hard to argue against his logic on this point.

I would love to debate you on this as a 10 year multi animal rescue owner............. (please PLEASE tell me that a mare treats a stallion the same way... Please PLEASE tell me that a male sheep and a female has no difference.... ducks? mongoose? pigs?..... DOGS? I've bread South African BoerBoels for over 20 years....) your entire premise makes me terrified at the lack of experience you (and very probably most people) have.

I'd love to talk to you about this as a father of multiple home schooled kids, even my "tomboy" girls are clearly feminine and act accordingly when left to their own devices.....

I think you need to re-evaluate some base premises.

or at least, corral your opinions to things you have experienced personally.

I'd also love to talk to you about your apparent lack of experience with these two vectors...........

Please tell me, does emphasizing the differences in the sexes make for better life, better relationships or,,,,,,,, not?

Can my wife or daughter do the same physical things that I can do? Can I respond with the social eloquence/nuance/empathy that my female counterparts have skill sets in as effectively?

Nature has defined our roles, we are the ones who reject them.... and how is that working out so far? (seems to be very bad, from my observation).

Simply excellent.

¤=[Post Update]=¤




I think it's The Seth Material where Seth points out that we humans artifically overemphasise the differences in the two sexes, that other species, such as cats and dogs, do not do that. It would be hard to argue against his logic on this point.

I would love to debate you on this

Obviously you would, too much so.
But the thread was about masculine vs feminine behaviour, and I don't particularly see that in animals. I've never seen a mare primping in front of a mirror and a stallion lifting weights.

Wow... please re-read the TargetT statement.