A Call To Men

Amor wrote

Survival is not a sport to women but it is a sport to men.

Joker would love to be an Amazonian tribe’s sex slave (“in another life,” he says, “I’m taken.” :romance-heartbeating: )

So have you enjoyed stirring the pot? :mrgreen:

There’s plenty of guys out there who’re renters, they’ll never own very much of anything, but many are decent, they don’t drink too much or beat their women.
They can fix things, cars or computers, and put food on the table, for themselves, their women and children if they have any, but forget about trips to Hawaii, fine dining or expensive clothes and jewelry.
But are these the men 98% of women want to shack up with?
If they have to, on their way to meeting ‘Mr Right’, AKA ‘Prince charming’, AKA wealthy, powerful business executive.
Women were always attracted to men with power and status.
Centuries ago it was nobility, further back it was warlords and kings, and now it’s men like Donald Trump, and this is what I mean by women being complicit in the evil men do.
Women are often just as greedy and power mad as men, but they don’t have to do all the dirty work of buying and selling, hiring and firing, wheeling and dealing, pillaging and plundering, imperialism, genocide, you name it, what they’ve done for millennia and what they still by and large to do this day is sell themselves, their souls, if they ever had any, to the men that do, which makes them just as guilty in a round about way.
Behind every good man was a good woman, and behind every tyrant, a malevolent harpy.
Where were the women protesting all the wars, or the millions of jobs shipped overseas?
The answer: they were at home, reaping the benefits.

When you feel your own power you don’t need someone elses. That you can take to the bank. Women who felt their own strengths without any masks or crutches would make me very happy.

Male agenda?

B-b-ut MUH INNOCENT PRINCESSES.

Insight in to the psyches motivations, capacity for proper nurture, being able to see to it that different processes unfold in time, “weaving fate” as Pallas Athena, etc. But also very primarily, being physical in a natural, not provocative, but nurturing way. Feminism has, at least in Europe, taken that away from humanity. Women there are like eggshells. Not broken, just hollow eggs. There’s nothing inside if they break, and unbroken there’s no weight they put in any scales. So men live random lives of shit there, on the whole. A man simply can not function like a proper man without a good relationship with women. Like an atom can not exist without its inner tension working properly.

The dismissal by women of men, like your remarks about men in general, is pure sadism, you know that I hope, its a rhetorical means you are using to hurt people, to get a reaction. That’s a very feminine ‘wile’, typical of a world where neither men not women know themselves. A women that doesnt honor a man is no woman. I am a functional, happy man because of my powerful love and respect for women, and the way I am loved by woman. Men that dont uphold women, women who dont uphold men, these are not worth this Earth, and they will be purged.

The next war will be that of the sexes against the sexless. The Transgender revolution is the setup for this war, which will not unlikely eradicate most of humanity. Transgenderism is nothing more or less than the end of the line, natures self-denial, depression and preparation for suicide; A transgender cant procreate. That is what’s going on behind the pc facade: the reason people mutilate themselves that way is their loathing of life. Trannies are thus trans-life. Walking death.

youtube.com/watch?v=k2C5TjS2sh4

The future is mostly up to whether women will manage to find a pride that doesn’t rely on shaming their sons, brothers and fathers. A creature that shames its origins and curtails the happiness of its progeny is a miscreant. That’s not debatable. If this age is to belong to women, there is work to do. Nothing has been accomplished for woman the past century, she’s been marginalized entirely, and no longer holds a respectable place in society - she’s just a second or third, fourth, fifth rate mannish thing now.

I find it interesting that men spend their time either complaining or outright denigrating women rather than praising women in any fashion. We may be better off without any of your kinds of attentions.

Never ceases?

This is relatively new! Men and women (can) want this!.. I think. As opposed to the stereotypical “well kept woman” of our past… this is a suggestion.

Keep in mind the emotions of men, and the locale (Kenya vs…?). The morality is a function of culture, and an imposition of said culture.

Keep in mind that we impose the ideal… we came from the ideal… who are we to impose? Who is to say that our end is not the perverse?

So Wendy is in fact Gib?

Except that Mr. Wendy isn’t feminine at all. This thread is a proof on its own. Mr. Wendy wants us to confuse genders. Let us have women without feminine instincts and men without masculine instincts. It’s all gonna work out in the end.

WendyDarling wrote:

maimonides1.jpg

Teach a woman to physically save herself, to learn to protect her own supposed soul and to stand up for herself, and you have taught her life-long lessons.

Gloominary,

Define femininity to me, Gloominary, by YOUR standards.

Who are we females?

What is our uniqueness?

What is our identity?

You see cost and I see gain - far more than simply having more freedom and independence.

In the past, we were not seen for who we were, our uniqueness and our identity. What cost?
We were seen for what the man, not all men, but many men, needed and desired us to be.
What does THAT say about those kind of men and those kind of men of today?

Men were the potters and we were their clay.

Time to peer deeply into that marble and form a deeper wider real perception of what is.

If a man cannot see the femininity in a woman who is say a firewoman, a policewoman, an astronaut, a soldier, et cetera, perhaps it is because there is a great lack of masculinity or humanity in the man himself.

Now, it’s turned around. Now the feminists see men as only what they need or desire them to be. And often, men are the scapegoats for the problems of the world. They ought to be molded so that they are more like women.

I’m worried that it’s an undefined lack of humanity in man himself. Men will do great things for their own (women), but also great atrocities to other’s (women) as if the nature of ownership signifies its worth rather than an inherent worth in the inherent owner, the woman herself. In other words, without being owned by a man in his love, you as a woman have no value, no humanity to consider. Very sad and I haven’t seen this discussed elsewhere.

I would love to teach women to fish. I excel at fishing. :smiley:

I suppose I take a more evolutionary psychology approach to defining femininity and masculinity, so you can probably figure out where I’m going with this, thou I’m not entirely sold on everything science has to say about human origins, I think it’s generally the safest bet.

Women are like men, but with a womb, and all that entails.
You can’t really understand women without understanding children.
Women typically develop a much more intimate bond with children.
Not only do they carry them in their wombs for 8 or 9 months, but they were, and typically still are responsible for nursing them, and for looking after them, especially during their formative years.

In the past, many children died within the first year or two of life, infant morality rate was far higher than it is today, because children were especially susceptible to disease, injury and malnutrition, which were more rampant only centuries ago.
Of course there was no contraception either, so women had a lot of children, and they had to have a lot of children or the human race would not survive.
Consequently their lives, along with their physiology, neurology and typically their psychology revolved around children, where as men’s lives revolved around other things.

In addition to children, women represent the hearth and the home, all that was domestic and domesticated, everything safe, sound and secure, familiar, everything anthropomorphic, soft and social, where as men had to venture out into nature.
While women tended to children and perhaps gathered tinder or some berries nearby, men had to deal with change and otherness, with the mysterious, the unknown and the inhuman.
They had to go on adventures, take chances and confront dangers, wild beasts, trade and go to war with other clans who might try to steal their women, or flocks.

And so as far as intelligence goes, women are a little more social, they tend to be better with verbal, and nonverbal articulation, and expression, and listening.
They’re more likely to talk things out, or use tact, their wiles, deception rather than resorting to overt aggression.
They’re passive aggressive, manipulative and indirect.
They can be more submissive, at least overtly, again their aggression is often hidden, you probably won’t even notice you’ve been had until long after the fact, if ever.

They are less daring, risk averse.
They’re not as good with objective things, like logic, maths, and visual spatial intelligence.
They’re better with the psychological, the subjective, the emotive and the irrational.
A lot more women seem to have religious or spiritual inclinations, but yet they tend not to be the leaders of these institutions, or of institutions in general, but of course this trait will be attributed to patriarchy.
They’re not as good at improvising, imagining or innovating, they prefer order and regularity, the familiar, to play it safe, to not wander too far off the beaten track, physically, mentally, artistically and intellectually.
It’s sort of a paradox men tend to be both more objective on the one hand, and unruly on the other, and women subjective, yet also more organized, punctual.

They’re better at taking care of children, especially girls of course, but boys too during their early years, after which boys tend to drift further apart from their mothers and gravitate more towards their fathers, during adolescence, but also they’re better at take care of the lame, sick, infirm and elderly.
It’s a cliche, but men are more protective, and women more nurturing.

Being dependent was part of what made females female, so it a loss to some extent, however, it doesn’t have to be total.
Women can still be independent, but take on more traditional jobs or roles in relationships, not because they’re forced to, but because they realize their physiology and psychology is more adapted, more suitable to these jobs and roles, it’s easier, more natural…where their strengths lie.
Women don’t have to be exactly like men or totally unlike a traditional woman in order to be fully independent, is what I was saying.
I’m not suggesting independence itself necessitates the eradication of femininity, by/large it does not, but it’s how feminists interpret the implications of this newfound freedom, that diminishes femininity, how they wish to control for their own purposes, according to their own ideals, or the ideals of the puppet master.

Women were more dependent on men than they are now, althou for better/worse we’re all more dependent on the state and big business, some more than others, which equally dominate, exploit, yet cultivate and protect both men and women, women more in some ways and men more in others.
However this dependence of yore wasn’t absolute, women were always free to be themselves to some extent, their families had to allow them to be themselves, develop what was already there down certain channels, rather than impose something completely alien and foreign onto them, because it wouldn’t work, so I think it’s wrong to say women were completely repressed and not really themselves, they were basically themselves, and could only ever function as themselves, but yes some of these energies were manipulated and directed for male interests/the interests of the family, the tribe.

This makes it sound as thou women were born a blank slate, with no nature, which I contest.
Women had a nature, and while men sometimes tried to manipulate it in ways they thought was good for the family, or for themselves, if they pushed too far in one direction, the woman would break, or couldn’t help but resist.
Women already were what they were, basically fully formed, and then women themselves and men came along and worked with the abilities, instincts and energies already present.
Men did not conjure femininity out of the aether or program women like a robot or computer from scratch, althou I’m sure some men tried, *laughs.

And so what is it to you, whatever you wish it to be?
An unsolvable mystery?
Or is their an objective femininity, and it’s just I’ve gotten female nature wrong, you tell me.

And so what is masculinity or humanity to you?
An empty vessel we can pour anything we want into?
A roll of the dye?
Things are usually a combination of nature, nurture, experience, interpretation and decision, don’t you think?

The lion’s share of murderers are men. That’s not scapegoating, that’s murdering. The lion’s share of rapists are men. The lion’s share of destructive violence is perpetuated by men. The lion’s share of depravity is enacted by men. There’s no escaping what men are and do, men need to change…evolve just as women do. It’s time for women to move past the limitations of men…that’s all.

Women are masters of psychological warfare, and it’s only a small minority of men that do these things, most men are fine, only a few need to change.
And like I said, the same, or similar instincts and energies that make men more prone to being villains, also make them more prone to being heroes, when properly harnessed, or when existing in conjunction with our more benevolent instincts and energies…and we still need heroes, even in our safe, soft civilization.
That being said, when civilization is on the verge of collapsing, or it does collapse, and it likely will, all civilizations do sooner or later, hyper-aggressive sorts men will probably be more likely to survive, so long as they have some smarts and impulse control to back it up and it’s not completely crazy or antisocial, just dominant, and it’ll be these sorts of men many women will happily throw themselves at, or reluctantly, of necessity.