That’s stupid. There are standards that apply to all, and so, you can’t just set standards for yourself. Some standards you set for yourself, but not all. A standard for honesty, for example, is set for all, applies to all, so you can’t be a dishonest real man, real men must be honest to be real men.
Penises do not post on forums, cannot log into forums, cannot register on forums, cannot read forums, cannot visit forums, so they are not members. Their owners, however, can, but that does not mean it’s penises doing the work from behind, they aren’t doing any work, unless you get into online someone’s pants offline.
I think it’s like one of those processes in nature - human nature, individual human evolution. I may be wrong here but I personally think and feel that a man who is a Man doesn’t have to prove anything, doesn’t have the necessity to feel that he has to prove anything. He is comfortable within his own skin. But then, that’s only one sign of what makes a man - or a woman for that matter.
For a Man, there would be no weirdness or even right reason for holding their GFs or wife’s purse. It would only be done because the moment called for it. Even if the moment didn’t call for it? What’s the differnce. It is only our social conditioning, the way we’ve been brought up, peer pressure, even the peer pressure between adults - our personal “belief” of what makes a man as opposed to the reality of it, which makes it mean something as opposed to being just what it is - a moment in which something is done. I’ve held doors open for men, helped them pick up things which they’ve dropped. I’ve even bought flowers for a few. ( social conditioning). I haven’t felt like less of a woman because of that. Of course, I realize that this isn’t about me but I’m making a point here.
We’re human first.
But to answer your question further, in THIS VERY OFTEN RIDICULOUS SOCIETY, a man feels that he has to prove himself to be a man.
Strangely enough, I tend to feel that the very ones who always have to prove something, to show something, are the ones who are still very much an ongoing process but who have not learned that as of yet, although we all are all THAT at times. Did I say that correctly?
So to answer your question even further - in a more ideal world, it would NOT have to be about proving or earning something but just about realizing that we are an ongoing process of development. Sometimes we’re more of a man and sometimes we’re less. Sometimes, we’re more of a woman (as in my case) and sometimes we’re less. We flow and ebb and circle around the bend. As long as we keep moving…
What’s one trait that defines masculinity. I actually prefer “defines being a man”. Masculinity may be defined as someone who is all pumped up from lifting weights. But then again, women do the same thing and look almost the same way.
A man takes care of his own, especially his children. A man thinks for himself and doesn’t necessarily follow the way of the world unless he “knows” it’s the right way to go. A man has his own voice and doesn’t speak through the mouth of others, doesn’t make others his mouthpiece, a man doesn’t bow down and worship a god simply because others do unless he’s come through rational thinking and observation that it’s the right way to give his life purpose and meaning and serves a great purpose toward humanity.
When you think about it, most of these things can define a woman too…think about it. But you were speaking about men so…
You are very much mistaken. You need to come out from your fantasy world. Such men are not men but such fools who use to think that they are real men. You better not to join those useless creatures by seeing characters like Riddic on the screen or reading Neitzhe too much.
And, no matter how high they think about themselves, others do pay any attention to such men considering them grown but messed up children. No one in this world see them as real men, except themselves.
Alright, sanjay, I know that’s a challenge, you want to challenge me to a duel because you want all the forum ladies for yourself, you want to prove that it is you who are the real alpha, but without having to use the traditional means. No problem, my man, I accept your challenge (and I do so with love.)
First, let me make a simple observation: the guy on your avatar is an ugly fuck. If that’s you, and I am pretty sure it’s you, then you are one creepy old ugly fuck. Ladies, beware of this man, he’s carrying the ugly genes. You don’t want your children to be ugly.
Second, there is no need to end every single one of your posts with “with love, sanjay”. It’s redundant and dishonest. Do you really love every single one of forum members you interact with here? Are you saying you love even people like me? Don’t be ridiculous, sanjay! Be honest, sanjay! You don’t love everyone, not even most of us, or any of us! Ladies, beware of this man, he’s a liar.
Third, even if you have to use that line, why not make it a signature instead of typing each time you post? Do you know how much time you can save with a simple solution like this? Sanjay, my man, your post count is 2,732. Do you know how many keystrokes is that? It is 2,732 posts multiplied by “with love, sanjay” which is 17 keystrokes in length, meaning, it is 46,444 keystrokes in total. That’s a lot of keystrokes, sanjay my man! If you are like me, your CPM (characters per minute) is 550, which means that you wasted 84 minutes of your life just typing “with love, sanjay”. But, if you are average, which you most likely are, and your CPM is 150, then you wasted 310 minutes of your life. That’s quite a lot, sanjay my man! Ladies, beware of this man, he’s not very efficient.
Fourth, pacifists, my man, are dead: they already tried your philosophy of pacifisim and they died. They were peaceful, they didn’t fight, and they died. Only warriors survived. You too, sanjay, are a warrior, but you are a suppressed warrior, you are a warrior who’s been forced to deny his nature. So now you want to be a pacifist. You are like a woman, can’t decide what you want to do with your life. Do you want to be a warrior or do you want to be a pacifist? Didn’t you start out as a warrior? Weren’t your ancestors fond of murdering other people? Weren’t they, to use the modern language, psychopaths? And now, after you’ve been humiliated by other much superior warriors, now you want to be something else, a mushroom in the forest, a unicorn in the sky, a rainbow outside of your window, a rain in a hot summer day, oh sanjay, why do you do this to me? why do I have to crush you with such an easy feat? Give me some challenge, some work to do, something I have to struggle against in order to overcome you, give me something that will let me celebrate an epic victory, not an easy win equal in its rank to stomping a random cockroach in an old house. Ladies, beware of this mean, he is a warrior-gone-pacifist, he’s a pseudo-pacifist.
Fifth, and finally, my man, you are a wimp who’s jealous of real men, of warriors, of your own nature. You are biologically enslaved. And you are proud of it. Ladies, this man won’t make you wet.
When you tell people they need self-control, particularly people who lack it, what happens is that the individual lacking self-control further detaches from himself.
When they try to exercise their self-control, they approach the idea in the same manner retards from MGTOW approach women or religious fanatics approach God or the Good: memorizing codes and using them as guidelines for ‘correct’ behavior, in this case how to be a ‘real man’, resulting in hyper-masculine displays & a tad of schizophrenia.
The conflicts experienced between the individual’s acquired identity (i.e. the focus his dominating need takes) and his own (that which is being repressed) is experienced as strong anxiety, always lingering in the unconscious, and from time to time, arising. A religious fanatic, for example, must experience a great deal of pain, if he were to return to the chaotic state required for the re-organisation of himself as a whole.
Knowing self followed by directing self requires strength, honesty, and continuous investment of energy required for it. Easy to be seduced in a state of ignorance by already ordered entities. No need for strength and honesty, just submissiveness and hope in your pimp
The 1830s brought male girdles that created feminine wide hips and nipped waists and in previous centuries, men were expected to primp and preen and for the results to look like they did. The concept of masculinity varies historically and culturally and although " the dandy was seen as a 19th-century ideal of masculinity, he is considered effeminate by modern standards". It would appear that manliness is a concept that a majority of people today associate with aggression, competitiveness and heterosexuality. Is masculinity nothing more than something that is imposed on you through societal norms.
I am not challenging you because i see you like a innocent but confused child, who is trying to satisfy his newly found malehood with absurd claims. I am just trying to show you the mirror so that you can realize your mistake and make corrections, something just like your parents/elders would do for you. That is all.
And, that is precisely what I mean by “love” in my signature. It does not mean sex or romance but care.
Secondly, having crossed 50, I do not need many women to satisfy my needs. My wife is alone enough for me, as she alone has been through out my life.
Lastly, I do not have any desire whatsoever to be that so called alpha male. I do not have any issue as being a common man. I have more important things to do in my life than persuing “alphaness”.
Being a “man” was a borrowed concept from more ancient times when being male did not mean being a man. There were only a handful of “men”. Being a man (as in manager, manifest, manipulator, mantle, mantra,…) refers to being more solid, reliable, certain, and boldly influential, having a long term effect upon society, a “soul”. The first of such was properly named “Ahdam”, the manager of Eden, one who orders the chaos and takes charge.
Much later, no doubt so as to encourage less sheepishness and more pride, the term started being applied to all males who were at least married and owned property. Eventually it was reduced to refer merely to any male human. Now people have to say “be a real man” rather than being able to merely say “be a man”, even though both still imply courage and forthrightness (as opposed to being a snake, worm, sheep, mouse, or rat).
Unfortunately the term never got strongly associated with being intelligent or wise.
By the way, it seems to me that you have wrong perception about the works of brain hemispheres.
left brain dominated people tend to be more logical, analytical and realistic, while right brain dominated ones prefer to live in fantasy, though use to have better creative and visual skills.
Here it is -
The brain is divided into left and right hemispheres. Each hemisphere controls its own unique set of activities or tasks. The right side of the brain tends to be more dominant in creative activities, while the left side of the brain tends to be more dominant in logical or analytical activities. These hemispheres communicate with each other through a large bundle of nerve fibers called the corpus callosum, and through several smaller nerve pathways.
The right side of the brain is more visual oriented, involved in activities such as visual imagery and face recognition. The right side of the brain tends to view information as a whole, rather than as individual details. It also tends to process information more intuitively or randomly. The right side of the brain is involved in spacial abilities, such as judging the position of things in space, and knowing your body position.
The left side of the brain processes information more logically or sequentially. The left side of the brain is dominant in understanding and using language, including listening, reading, speaking and writing. It is involved in the memory for spoken and written messages, and plays a major role in the analysis of information.
A bit of distillation is needed here, 4give the thought, but right-left brain distinction has little nowedays to clear up such ideas as: questions pretaining to what a ‘real man’ is, or whther the autistic/schizotypal continuum plays into such distinctions.
Relevance, focus, and defensive-projective stances aggravate issues which are really thoroughly modern.
Case at hand: Kathilynn Jenner. Whether it can be said of ‘him/her’ whether he/she is a rwal man/woman begs more on questions of tuthfulness, than morphology. By the same token, left/right brain hamisphere’s have been made irrelevant, by larger issues, such as the effects of modern society on individuals previously not prevy to such pressures.
The genetic causes have been largely overshadowd by the vastly changed societal landscape we live in, and the question which whould be raised is, whether genetic bluepeints themselves can be augmented or even trnsformed thereby?
If the former Bruce Jenner, can faithfully say, that he did what he did, to transform himself, because primarily, and almost exclusively due to the way he ALWAYS felt about himself, (rather then giving in by most part-to ego’s demands of emotioal-sexual-self image pressures ----------------leading to opportunistic, publicity prone, advantge seeking?) then let it be left an open question. However,are such revelations frelevant nowedays? Is not it a fact, that current opinion makes it prone for people, to make the best of a ‘situation’ formerly resigned in a nihilistically frozen world of individual angst begotten
world view/self image?
social conditioning). I haven’t felt like less of a woman because of that. Of course, I realize that this isn’t about me but I’m making a point here.
