Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Topics - Malakas

Main / Round and Around.
Sep 17, 2006, 07:56 AM
Evualuate all the texts you read and ask:
Didn't somebody say this already?
Haven't we had this fight before?
What progress have we made since the last guy made the same point?
Who gives a f**k who won or lost in a very personal confrontation of ideas, because the majority of men are still stuck in the same dirty bucket?

Are they interesting questions or not?
Next question is for the enlightened ....... Anybody want to guess?
Main / Men Laughing at Themselves.
Jun 06, 2006, 09:13 AM
I receive many jokes in my e-mail that are only understandable to western men living in a feminized world. They're not actually funny unless you count a painful grimace as funny.

Here's a starter, anybody want to add (or is it just too ridiculous)?
A little boy comes down to breakfast. Since his family lives on a farm, his mother asks if he has done his chores." Not yet," said the little boy.
His mother tells him no breakfast until he does his chores.

Well, he's a little pissed, so he goes to feed the chickens, and he kicks a chicken. He goes to feed the cows, and he kicks a cow. He goes to feed the pigs, and he kicks a pig. He goes back in for breakfast and his mother gives him a bowl of dry cereal.

"How come I don't get any eggs and bacon? Why don't I have any milk in my cereal?" he asks.

"Well," his mother says, "I saw you kick a chicken, so you don't get any eggs for a week. I saw you kick the pig, so you don't get any bacon for a week either.
I also saw you kick the cow, so for a week you aren't getting any milk."

Just then, his father comes down for breakfast and kicks the cat halfway across the kitchen.

The little boy looks up at his mother with a smile, and says "Are you going to tell him, or should I?"

This is Norway. Not the raunchiest of counties. So presumably the 40, 50, 60, 70 year old men who were questioned were having sex with 40, 50, 60, 70 year old women?
And they still enjoy it?

Decades ago I remember an inebriated discussion in our local pub/bar with a group of farmers. It was harvest time in the northern latitudes so we didn't get to the bar till sunset - around 10pm - so we had to drink fast.
The oldest member (around 70) was asked for an assessment of his sexlife. He answered, 'Ah'm content'. A precocious youth asked him, "What about satisfying your wife"? He looked up from his pint of beer with a confused expression and asked, Ehh????
Main / Biology vs Brainwashing
Feb 14, 2006, 09:23 AM
A week or so ago a na´ve (young?) female poster postulated that one of the problems with relationships these days was that people married too young - she specified under 30. It reminded me of a contrasting article I read recently where female doctors in Europe were trying to warn women about the risks in starting a family late in life.

I found this astonishing and my mind flashed back to a discussion I had with my ex-wife decades ago. She was in med-school then and one day told me about a fascinating lecture from the professor of obstetrics in which he said (biologically speaking) the best age for women to start having children was 16-18. He also added that menstruation was a relatively modern aberration since in a state of nature a woman would be either pregnant or lactating until she reached the menopause.

I never realized at the time what political dynamite such a statement would be today. There is much to be said in favor of regulating reproduction for the greater good of 'civilized society' (whatever that is),  but not even politicians can fast-forward a few million years of evolution to suit their current agenda. They can throw money at women's health issues and that's about all.

A little research was revealing. Back in 1935, Anthony Ludovici was saying much the same and quoted from a host of medical sources. Even in those days he was aware of the mood of the times and raised the threshold a little. Even some modern sources recommend 'in her twenties'. By the way, while scanning Ludovici's work I came across this gem:

To enter matrimony, in fact, in the spirit with which people pursue pleasure, is hardly rational.  And yet what with the romantic tradition in fiction and the films, and the reprehensible reluctance of middle-aged folk to speak out truthfully before their juniors about marriage, modern youth is usually given a picture of matrimony which is no more like reality than a fairy tale.

Later studies (50's - 60's) showed that the highest survivability ratios for infants correlated to younger women married to older men (provided the guy wasn't too old).
Such studies may not be credible today since health care has advanced so rapidly in the last half century. However it seems plausible that where the woman was young and healthy and her husband had material resources (how else could he have a young wife?), the mother would be well nourished and have a higher than average standard of medical care and advice.

Some interesting studies from outside the west (India, Iran, Kenya) looked at the issue from the opposite angle - why younger mothers sometimes didn't do so well, considering biology was on their side. Their conclusions were all the same - that the younger mothers often came from poorer, less educated homes and the standard of their ante-natal care was lower. A world-wide study agreed but revealed it's own bias with -  Thus illiteracy and poverty reinforce the cycle of teenage pregnancies together with their associated complications.

By the time I turned to the up-to-date western sites my eyeballs were beginning to seep blood as I plowed through the  PC propaganda. E.g. this, from the Expectant Mother's Guide:
Due to the increasing popularity of late pregnancy, it is imperative to consider more desirable and friendly terms to use when referring to older pregnant women. The terms elderly primigravida, post-mature, and obstetrically senescent are somewhat negative. Less offensive terms such as mature primigravida or advanced maternal age may be more appropriate.

Politics is never far away. This from the New York Daily News:
Acknowledging the need for more information, federal lawmakers recently introduced the Safe Motherhood Act for Research and Treatment, co-sponsored by longtime women's health advocate Rep. Nita Lowey, D-N.Y., which calls for research on pregnancy risks for all women.  Women over 35 are at higher risk for complications, and after age 39 they are (more) likely to die as a result of pregnancy," says Lowey. "It is an embarrassment that the United States ranks 20th of 49 developed countries in maternal mortality. "It gets worse: The latest study, released by scientists at North Carolina's National Institute of Environmental Health Science, found that female fertility starts dipping before age 30. Once they do conceive, older women are more likely to deliver early, and to have babies of low birth weight or with a genetic disorder like Down syndrome, a cause of retardation and heart problems. was refreshingly honest under the heading 'Why does fertility decline so rapidly?' But then they had to go and spoil it all by adding, lower down:
What are the advantages of being an older mother?
On the plus side, older mothers have some physical and psychological benefits over their younger counterparts. Women in their 30s or 40s might lead a healthier life-style; they understand the needs of their bodies, look after themselves better in terms of exercise and nutrition. Studies have shown that mature women have more positive perceptions of their bodies, and that they more readily tolerate the symptoms of pregnancy. At this age too, a woman has more confidence to know what she wants, and enhanced people skills to get it.
- I might have grown a little cynical over the years but my first thought was "yeah right".

Some members might think this post belongs under 'History & Politics' but I would disagree. Tinkering with nature is a part of our everyday lives. When it gets down to reproduction it's a men's issue - even if they're only involved for a minute or two. Male taxpayers are very much involved if they're going to take on 'Mother Nature' on behalf of those women who believe that feminism entitles them to play fast and loose with biology.

Comments appreciated.[/i]