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.
Messages - realman
"These women set standards which are insanely high then bitch when they cannot meet their own standards. "
Yup...just like when there's "no decent men" out there to date/marry! :lol:
To quote from Ernest goes to camp:
Everything about that story and the people involved is messed up!
"If men don't want to marry a self-absorbed menopausing ocelot, there is something wrong with men."
:idea: THAT is the funniest line I've read in a LONG time :lol:
Could it be?
One point I take issue with is the suggestion that secretaries are mostly not feminists and are never b$tchy. I've seen plenty fo secretaries spout misandrist jokes and comments and carry the "it's all about me" attitude. If they are good looking, they will also act like an average looking guy with double their education, double their income, double their brains, and a decent personality to boot is completely beneath her.
My comments here have been not only regarding physical attributes but the "whole package". I think women tend to set the bar above their own level in pretty much all respects- intelligence, appearance, education, income, "human decency", wit, etc. With women being more edcuation, making more money, etc. and still looking only for men who are substantially above them in these respects, it makes it harder and harder for guys to be "up to the standard".
That is an interesting take on how women get their overinflated sense of "market value"! I never thought about how the male/female ratio and "beer goggles" would conspire to cause this phenomena, but you may be on to something! Throw in the feminist propaganda- "you're too good for him", "you're worth it", "you're all that", "you can do better", "your too good for any man", etc. and I can see how once a woman has dated or mated "up" she will convince herself that she is a few nocthes above reality. Also, once she gets a little used to being able get guys a couple notches above her, she probably won't come back to reality...unless she gets into her 30s and starts wanted to be "married with children", in which case her standards/expectations may come back in line. But this does tend to have a tone of "well, I gues you'll have to do" for any guy who becomes attractive to her only after she lowers her standards!
When a fminist type tries to make a case like...
"women are much more rational. that's why we talk so much, to process and express our thoughts, while men say nothing, grunt, groan, etc."
"when women have emotional outbrusts, cry for no apparent reason, etc. etc. it's because we're more in touch with our feelings than men are"
"In touch with" and "overwhelmed by" are not synonyms
"when we complain, criticize, and nag it is simply because we see the best in every situation and want the best possible outcome...not because we are unhappy"
which is to say you're not getting things your way so your gonna bitch about it...
"women care more about love and relationships and care more deeply than men..."
yup, that's why they cheat just as much as men, use men for money, status, an ego boost, or whatever, initiate divorce twice as foten as men, do more of the breaking up, do more of the nasty manipulation in relationships (i.e., passive-aggressive, witholding sex, usaing unspoken requests and then lashing otu when unmet, etc.)
I just hate it when people try to make bad traits sound good, or blatantly ignore the facts and just impose their ideas if it suits their agenda...
you hit on the "symptom" I was describing, that through their attitudes and seeming rejection, women give men the impression that they are unattractive unless they are "perfect", but you didn't say anything about WHY women project this attitude to begin with. I guess what I'm saying is, why do women act like the "average" guy is not the least bit physically attractive while most men, once they grow out of their teenage "Pet of the month" fantasies, will be attracted to a wide variety of women? I don't think an average looking woman should act as if she's "above" an average looking guy and only gives guys who are extremely attractive the tiem of day. Personally, when I observe or overhear women in social settings I see this all the time...she's nothing remarkable, but she's only interested in the two best looking guys of the 30 guys in the place, for example. What's up with that? It seems like a double standard women have, where if she's a "5" he needs to be at least a "7". This seems to apply with regards to looks, income, personality, etc. Intelligence it seems to be a different phenomena- it seems like women want a guy who's maybe a 5-7 on the intelligence scale, they want a guy who's got half a brain but not one who's extremely intellectual.
It is interesting also that what I say about the "double standards" applies primarily to young women, and if a women gets into her 30s her standards seem to fall more in line with what would seem reasonable. Which in some ways is good- but it seems liek it would be better if her standards were realistic right from the start. Maybe the high standards are an indication fo a woman looking to "prove herself" or who is just having fun and not really interested in (or ready for) a serious relationship? I do wonder if as women get older and they focus less on the "bad boys" etc. if it is really "older and wiser" or if it's "lowered expectations"? I know a lot of guys who are practically ignored by women in their teens and 20s become sought after in their 30s, and while they like finally being able to attract female attention they also feel a bit like they are "second best", that women don't really want them but are willing to "settle" for them.
It just seems to me like a lot of women set standards that end up not doing anyone, male or female, a whole lot of good in the long run.
Maybe "grrl power" just overinflates their egos and their self-concept of their "market value"?
Well, I've taken a couple hits there (not a full fledged, intentional attack mind you) too... nope, it's not something that's going to have a man down on the floor unable to move. But- it's pretty damn painful, it is a sexual attack (certainly a woman touching a man's genitals in a hostile manner when it is unwelcome- including a swift kick to them- at least qulaifies as sexual assualt just as it does when a man does it to a woman), and it does threaten a man's reproductive abilities (as well as his hormone balance I would have to imagine). So I still maintain that if a woman intentionally directs a blow to a man's genitals it should be the legal equivalent of rape. You wouldn't see a man get off the hook for kicking a woman in the groin...and unless he kicks AWFULLY hard she's got a lot less at stake (not that it wouldn't hurt I'm sure)! It may not be all it's cracked up to be in terms of putting a man down for the count, but it's still a potentially debilitating act of sexual violence that should carry a stiff penalty (it shoudl also carry a stiff penalty if done by a man to another man- it may be less "sexual" in nature but it should still be treated seriously).
I think this nice guy crap needs to be broken down into 3 categories:
1. the TOO nice guy (doormat)
2. the nice just to get in her pants guys (pretends to be nice just to get some)
3. the genuinely nice guy
Problem is, there seem to be plenty of decent looking, intelligent, interesting, genuinely decent human beings out there who barely appear on women's radar. It's undertsandable that women don't go for doormats and are suspicious of nice guys becuase some guys act nice just to get laid...but why is the genuinely decent guy somehow unappealing. Seems to me that if women had a clue, they'd go for the nice guys (just like any man who has a clue realizes he's better off with a "5" who's intelligent and a decent human being, than some human disater who happens to look like a centerfold model)....IMHO
AND THIS IS WHAT WE ARE UP AGAINST, men of planet earth
One more quick thought-
We all know women want us gusy to lsiten and attend to tehir every emotional need and be "there for them" as they run their mouths about anythinga nd everything. Well, it also occurs to me that the popular advice is for women to just accept it because men "can't deal as well on a n emotinal/verbal/relational level"
Maybe it's just me, but I cry foul! Personally I think most men can deal with emotions BETTER than women, can communictae them just as well (IF they feel it is safe to do so, and that someone cares and will listen- WOMEN take note!), and can communicate just as well. The difference is, men realize what needs to be talked abotu and what doesn't...we don't talk just to talk. I just get annoyed when it is amde to sound like men just can't deal with things on that level, and that women are therefore better communicators. Let's put it this way...would any sane person read a clumsy, overly-wordy, repetitive texbook of 1000 pages if they knew the important information conatined therein was available in a 50 page, well-worded, concise hadnbook? The point being, "talking more" doesn't make one a better cmmunicator.
I also take issue with this frame of reference because it plays to the "all about me" thing- HE won't LISTEN! Well, my 2 cents is he'll listen if you talk about stuff worth saying, and if HE gets equal airtime! :shock:
In general, it seems to me that if "he doesn't listen to her" it's because he'd have no life if he did, and because he can hardly get a word in edgewise :wink: I bet men would suddenly be much better listeners (and also "open up") if women just indicated a desire to hear about him. I don't hear many women actually encoruaging their guy to talk about his experiences, hopes, fears, feelings, thoughts, etc.- but I bet if she showed an ounce of interest, and didn't silence him by the constant repetitive motion of her lips moving up and down, he'd be very happy to "open up" to her, and he'd also lsiten to her!
Ya know, I was going to write a post here on this general topic but since it's already under discussion...
Yeah, what the hell is up with this attitude? I mean, you can't go a day without hearing "how stupid men are when it comes to women", how men know "nothing about dating", how men "aren't romantic", how men are "selfish in bed" and "don't know how to please a woman in bed". And then there's that attitude of "I'm too good for you...unless your a perfect 10, over 6'4, ride a motorcycle, make tons of money, or can spout the bulls&%$, drivel, lines, and obnoxious attitude that I just find irresitable".
I dunno...just seems liek women are awfully focused on "what can he do for me" and "I want more than this" with very little consideration for reciprocity. How much do you hear "how stupid women are when it comes to men/dating", how "women aren't romantic", how women are "selfish in bed" and "don't know how to please a man in bed". But in my experience, women should be hearing PLENTY of this! I think it's partly that as guys, we've been conditioned to not ask for more, not expect more, give in to her to "keep the peace" and/or "get a piece", etc. MEN, we need to voice our opinions!!! We need to let women know if they're selfish and obnoxious, if they can't shut up about whatever they can't shut up about, if they are nagging us ceaselessly for no good reason, if they come 3 times every tiem and you get one (especially if she isn't helping the process), if she wans you to "go down" but refuses to "go down" or swallow, if you're being romantic and she does jack,....SAY IT! Call her out on it! DOn't let yourself be whipped just because you're afraid to lose her or access to her body. IT's not worth it.
I also find it hilarious, in a really sick and demented way, that women say they know so much more about love/romance/relationships blah blah blah. They don't! I see no evidence that women know more (or care more). They initiate most of the breakups and most of the divorces. They complain and nag incessantly and then complain mroe because her guy "isn't listening" or "isn't romantic like he used to be" (what sane idnividual would?). They blame men for anything that goes wrong in a relationship. They can "love" a man for decades then screw him for all he's worth in divorce corut just to better their own position and to hurt him (as if he's not likely hurt enough by the divorce). Also, the fact that the various "systems" actually work on women is a sad statement on the emotional, intellectual, and relational situation of many women!
It seems that women are more interested in excitement, "being given a life", being entertained, having status or power, money, and security, having an ego boost, etc. than in having an qctual loving relationship. Of coruse there are guys who want these types of things as well...but personally, and I hear this from any other guys too- that's not what most of us want.
I also find it interesting that women have the standards they do for men. THe attitude I mentioend above about "I'm too good for you...unless". It is interesting how many women shun guys who are equally good looking, more intelligent, more wordly, make the same or greater money, have more of a "life", etc. It seems like women are "too good" for guys that should be "too good" for them! Partly the joke is on her, because often the guys she gets will really only want her physically, but there are also guys who "settle" for less than they should, tolerate thingsthey shouldn't etc. I think it's time women be brought back down to earth and realize that if she's a 4, she has no reason to set her standards for men above, at most, a 5! Seems simple enough, but women don't get it...so they complain that there's no good men, men complian that there's no good women and even so I'm not good enough for them anyway, etc. Often women once they get into their 30s seem to lower their standards...but the thing is, this just makes most of the guys feel like they're "seconds"...not what she really wants, but she got a little more desperate and "settled" for him...how romantic and loving! :roll:
But really, why is it that women seem to ridicule the male body and have very little attraction to it unless it is a rare, perfect specimen? Do women really think that most men only want a playboy model (I would dare say most guys, especially if they are looking for serious relationship, would find an average girl attractive...wheras it seems if a women goes for less than an 8 she's "settling")? Is it tehir way of "getting back at us"? Is it that because they've been drilled to dislike and disrespect men, the natural attraction to the male body has also been drilled out of them? What about issues like decency, intelligence, being an interesting person, etc.? It seems like often "her" definition is she wants him to treat HER decently but he doesn't have to actually be a decent guy; she wants him to not be a caveman, but she doesn't want him to be too smart (for her? perhaps high intelligence is unattractive to most women simply because they'd be threatened by it?); she things he's "interesting" if he wants to do everything she wants to, or if he provides her with excitement, thrills, and entertainment- but if he's not as brazenly exciting he's "boring".
Guys do share responsibility in this because a guy who's a 8 or 9 or 10 on all levels will often settle for a girl who's a 8 or 9 or 10 in looks and a 3 or 4 in everything else. I think guys also tolerate this behavior because they are conditioned to persue, conditioned to expect rejection and risk it, and also since guys want relationships and or P____ they just have to "grin and bear it" to get it. But it shouldn't be this way, and they shouldn't put up with it. So again, there is something we emn can do to tilt the table back towards equilibrium. If we set our standards where they should be and start looking for equal partners, women will have two choices: be single, or bring their standards and expectation back in line with reality.
I also take issue with women expecting men to make the first move. If they're equal, they can do it as well as we can. This would go a long way towards improving the dating and relationship scenario for both men and women, methinks. The often ponted to issue of "the man pays" seems passe in my experience...perhaps there are some real goldiggers like that around, but in my experience women will offer to pay their portion of the bill. That's not to say there aren't plenty of golddiggers though!
I think we can squarely blame feminism for most of this...the "it's all about me/her" attitude, the lack of respect and consideration for men, the fears of men, the male-bashing, the use of sex as power, the clamoring for "equality" when it means she gets more but simultaneoulsy the refusal to give up anything for "equality", the confusion over gender roles which feed women's insecurities and cause them inflate their egos in order to feel powerful, desired, etc., the vengeful attitudes, etc.
ANyway, that's enough thought on it for now. Feedback on any and all points is welcome. I think it will be an uphill battle to get the masses of men to realize and/or do anything about it, and it also won't be easy to get females to change after they've gotten comfortable with their positions as self-appointed princesses.
Personally I think a blow to the groin should carry just about the same penalty as raping a woman. Besides the physical pain and the sexual nature of the attact, there is risk of serious health issues and/or infertility.
And I think anything that could result in infertility for a man through use of violent force should carry the same penalty as anything that could cause unwanted pregnancy for a woman through the use o violent force.
Just my humble opinion that men need to make it clear in no uncertain terms that their bodies deserve treatment just as good as that which is expected for women.
Every once in a while I hear a woman say something about "they should cut his balls off for that". To which I sometimes reply, "does that mean if you did it we should cut your breasts off"? The silence is usually deafening...