Islands

February 2, 2007
9:52 AM CST

Men are from somewhere, and women are from somewhere else. Seems like we’re not only from different places, we’re also going to different places.

And while we’ve always been different species, now there’s actual hostility going on out there. Read Dr. Helen’s post (and especially the Comments section).

You’ll find a couple of eye-openers if you go to her post and its source document (at WebMD). Sample (male):

“Never forget: the single most revolting image, the nightmare that haunts women, is that of the happy, grinning, sexually satisfied male. They really hate that and the sooner we adjust our social expectation to that fact, the better.”

“Feh. I’ll hang myself before I marry again.”

And from the other side of the matrimonial aisle:

“[I] have a little insight on why women lose interest in sex… It gets beyond boring for us thats why. It becomes a repetitive chore, akin to washing dishes.
...
“Theres no passion, no excitement, nothing. Sex feels like being poked and prodded like your some cow.”

and:

“Here is my reason for not wanting sex. Its because I am required to have it at least everyother day because my husband says he needs it at least that often or my husband feels he is frustated and has the right to be mean and hurtful to me. If I do some how manage to get an extra night off I get to hear about how I don’t put out, such a loving term. ALthough I do occasionally enjoy sex, most nights its a chore. His excuse for not trying to get me in the mood is that according to him I’m never in the mood so why should he try.”

Lotta distance there, for sure.

There are two issues here, I think: one is probably age-old, the other more recent.

As far as the old one is concerned, I think it’s probably true that a lot of men don’t know what women want, or need, to make them sexually responsive. It’s a problem that’s not going to go away until—[gasp!]—boys are taught by their fathers to respect and cherish women. I learned this from my father, and I know the answer to making a woman satisfied: it’s called intimacy. If a man is always intimate with his wife: touching, kissing, stroking, talking, she will respond in kind and, surprise surprise, she’ll be available for sex. I think women are hard-wired to be resistant to sex, because of the problem of the ages (unwanted pregnancy), and it’s only through intimacy that this resistance is overcome. But tragically, it seems that a lot of men are incapable of intimacy (judging by the comments at the other two sites). Let me be blunt about this one: a man who is incapable of intimacy with the woman he loves is still a child, and not a man at all.

And that’s all I care to say on this part of the problem—not because I’m squeamish about it, but because it’s intimate—and I don’t like to share intimacy with others. (This is why voyeur shows like Jerry Springer are so repugnant to me.)

The more recent problem is the one that interests me more, and it’s the one I alluded to in The Pussification of the Western Male: backlash. This comment at Dr. Helen’s post says it all:

What women really should be more afraid of than men’s anger is their complete indifference.

Truly, I believe that this is the ultimate (and unintended) consequence of the Feminist Revolution. As women have become more “empowered” and have distanced themselves from men, the response from men in general has been to look with a cold, clinical eye at what these empowered women are bringing to the table—and I have to say, judging from the reaction, the conclusion has been: not much.

Certainly, when you look at some of the more cynical statements in Dr. Helen’s Comments, it’s clear that men are starting to rebel against the whole feminism concept.

Look, there’s always been a certain degree of antipathy on the part of men towards women’s games. Phrases like “ball-buster” are not exactly new to the lexicon, after all. What has become more prevalent is the openness with which men air their discontent.

More worrying for society, however, is this. Older men (like myself) have always been cheerfully cynical about the whole love/sex thing: De Beers has built a global empire on it. Nothing surprising about that: experience breeds familiarity, and cynicism. What should worry women as a group is that the same attitude is manifesting itself in younger men.

How have younger men become prematurely cynical about women? I’ll tell you, in three short words.

Feminist social policy.

It starts almost as boys become young men, in middle- and high schools. All sorts of policies which favor the girls are put in place: “gender-correcting” (ie. female-biased) subject matter and testing, policies which pronounce pretty much that any boy accused of molesting a woman is guilty, regardless of his actual guilt, and policies which automatically set men up as the Big Bad Wolf: no touching, no flirting, no blah blah blah. The message of all these policies can be summed up quite simply: you are bad, and you have to keep away.

Fine; so they keep away. What the boys do, and it’s a logical progression, is that they either feign indifference towards women, or they actually become indifferent. The response, by the way, is also predictable: girls become desperate to attract the indifferent boys—with predictable results.

As soon as young men realize that the playing field is being tilted against them, and in favor of girls, they start to feel aggrieved. Never mind whether such a feeling is justified; it’s a simple fact.  Why date a girl, put up with all her clinging nonsense, when you can hire a lap dancer to come to your frat house?

I know I’m going to get accused of over-simplifying, and I don’t care. Frankly, the whole War of the Sexes is a simple matter, despite all efforts of the Psychological/Psychiatric Set to make it more complex (sorry, Helen).

And it doesn’t matter how much people are offended by what I say, either. I’m just the messenger, and the message is: men are sick of the Feminist Revolution, and the changes wrought in women by it.

One of my favorite lines in movies is Charles Grodin’s description of Robert De Niro’s character in Midnight Run: ”You have two moods: silence, and rage.” If women want to learn a little lesson, they could do a whole lot worse than understand that this description, admittedly somewhat over-simplified, pretty much describes all men.

And I foretold this in Pussification: at some point, men are going to get sick of all that feminist nonsense, and the nannying which is used to enforce it. Well, hostility has been ruled out—we men are all by now intimately familiar with the rules governing that emotion and behavior.

So to all you Grrrls out there: say hello to indifference, men’s ultimate, and unbeatable weapon.

-----------------------------------------------

Additional: The Mrs. and I have discussed this problem, often, and we discussed it both before and after I wrote this post. With her customary deft touch, she’s written a companion piece to this one, and I urge you all to read it.

One last thing: Comments at WebMD and Dr. Helen’s can be anonymous. I don’t allow anonymous comments here, so I’m asking everyone, if you feel moved to comment, to please omit your personal details: they’re nobody’s business but your own, and I for one am not interested in hearing them. This website is not an encounter group, except in the realms of guns and politics.

Update: The super-sappy Boris Johnson wades into the fray. The comments are worth the price of admission.

Comments

Bottom of Comments | Original Post

This website is not an encounter group, except in the realms of guns and politics.

Thank goodness.

Author ID: 1558 | 2/2/2007 11:09 AM CST | #80320


Kim,

For us (my wife and I), intimacy is heightened because we believe that marriage is an eternal event.  (Not looking for a religious debate).  So when the church announces that the “Two become One” life for the two is no longer the same.  And this physical, mental, emotional change is forever for each person.  Now their life in this world and the one to come is dependent on each other.  Kinda flies in the face of American Individualism.

So if you don’t really like the one you are married to, well it sure is going to be a LONG eternity!!!!!

I suggest you figure out how to improve things.

David

Author ID: 8174 | 2/2/2007 11:32 AM CST | #80322


Another problem with the feminist revolution is that women don’t know what they want. They know what they’re told to want but then there’s that damn biological stuff going on inside.  I don’t know how many times I’ve heard women say they want a man who is basically the touchy feely feminist ideal who’s in touch with himself blah blah blah and then turn around an hook up with some guy who treats her like dog crap. And then makes excuses for his behavior. Which leads me to believe that many feminists are schizophrenic because of their dogma. Beside have you ever noticed that the leaders of the feminist movement such as Gloria Steinem tended to marry men who made more money than them?  This include Pelosi and Boxer and Feinstein.

Author ID: 7019 | 2/2/2007 11:33 AM CST | #80323


It really is a sad state of affairs. I know many guys would would like to get married and have a family, but the emotional cost of a probable divorce and the ineveitable financial ass-raping he will get in court have just made it not worth it.

For YEARS I struggled with getting dates. I was brought up to be “very respectful” of women and to “be nice” and in general to exhbit ass-kissing behavior towards women. My parents are from a different generation - one in which gender roles were defined and there wasn’t as much overt gender hate. Might have worked back then. I was born in the late sixties - just as all the feminist shit really started to bloom. And although my parents are quite conservative, bottom line is that I was raised not knowing how to deal with women in the modern era.

Not knowing any different, I thought the way to attract women was to “be nice” to them, never argue with them, always buy them things, always pay for dinner...and well you guys know the rest. This is what my parents taught me. It seemed for a long time, all I ever received in return was a shit sandwich - the “Lets Just Be Friends” stuff. And I am getting this from fat and less desirable women. I didn’t think I could swing a REALLY hot woman. And to tell you the truth, I couldn’t because I didn’t know how to handle them. When I got into the dating world, I noticed so much bitterness, anger, materialism (in a bad way) and friction between men and women.

Well, being of at least average intelligence, I realized that doing the same thing over and over again and hoping for different results is insanity defined. So I started being less predictable. A bit edgy at times. Started busting on women with funny stuff - making fun of their obsession with expensive shoes, clothing, pop culture, etc. Not in a bad way mind you, but funny stuff. They may act surprised but they LOVE it. Further, I utterly stopped giving a shit about dating or sex in general. Additionally, I began serious development of my hobbies and career - shooting, reading and writing, working out and making money.

The result - now I have more opportunities to go out with women I would have never dreamed of going out with before. I literally cannot go out with all of them. And you know what, I still don’t date a whole lot - because now that I know I have it virtually on tap, I lost a lot of interest. Sex is never something to worry about or put a lot of effort into getting.

Further, I am on a marriage strike. Until society decides to recognize the right to be a man, I will continue to enjoy the company of beautiful women without marriage. Marriage may have worked in the “good ‘ol days” but now it clearly doesn’t. In the recent past, “back in the day” it took everyone working as hard as they could just to make it. I am talking just to eat and have shelter. Wasn’t until the advent of labor saving devices and general rising affluence that women could “stay home” and have most of the day off. This led to disconentment as the old addage proved true once again - an idle mind or body is the playhouse of the devil.

Enter Feminism - the cure for the woman who can’t realize “self-actualiztion.” Well, we all know what happend with that....Fast forward to today, women earned the right to vote, work, choose and to compete with men. But now that doesn’t make them happier either. They want it all with no responsibility - hence the wives of some of my peers who stay at home, send kids off to daycare, swill pills to make themselves stable, see therapists and run up ungodly bills, have lattes with their other similar friends, have a maid and STILL cannot keep a decent house, bitch the husband out for not making EVEN MORE MONEY and withhold sex.

Can’t say that I have the answers, but I think the emasculation of the American man directly led to this problem.

NOTE - I say “busting on them” and being funny - no still means no and men who condone physical violence against women are creeps of the highest order.

Author ID: 7763 | 2/2/2007 11:37 AM CST | #80325


I think the other cultural factor at work is a kind of infantilization of the modern male, i.e. the near elimination of the concept of “adulthood” for men.  Think about it:  In popular culture the self-absorbed, hedonistic impulses of adolescents and young men have been extended now all the way through adulthood and even into retirement. 

Fifty years ago a man in his late 20’s who still lived like an irresponsible teenager (no steady job, no wife or kids, still living with mom and dad) would have been a pitiable, contemptible creature.  But in movies, television, music and other forms of pop culture, this is actually seen as a laudable goal, and in fact, the desire to accept responsibility is often belittled as “selling out” and these “sellouts” are often portrayed as bitter, vindictive, means-sprited and profoundly unhappy because they don’t live the pleasure-driven, responsibility-free lifestyles of their more laid-back buddies. 

In the 1950’s there was a separate notion of the identity of an “adult” as opposed to an adolescent or a teenager.  Adult males wore ties (even when they went to dinner with family), they listened to smooth jazz or classical music, they had families and careers.  The other day, I was shopping and I saw a young couple, man and woman (I’m not presumptuous enough to assume they were husband/wife) appeared to be in their mid-20’s, with a toddler.  Mom and Dad both sported multiple tatoos and multiple facial piercings.  She was dressed like a prostitute and he was dressed like a gang-banger or wannabe rapper (redundancy alert.) And then there was the cute little kid.  I couldn’t help but wonder how this child would grow up thinking of his parents as adults? 

To me, growing up in the 60’s, my parents were the epitome of what I came to think of as “grown-ups.” They didn’t listen to popular music (both liked classical), dad was a curator at a museum, mom worked at a library.  If they had acted like the teenagers of their day, someone in that small Oklahoma town (where everybody knew everybody else) would have said to them “hey, you have kids, you need to set an example.”

How often have you seen men react to the prospect of another man getting married as saying “well, his life is over”?  How many times have you seen men denigrate the idea of getting steady job or even having kids because it would cramp their style and make it impossible for them to buy that next “toy”? 

It used to be that there were external rewards for being a responsible, mature adult.  Nowadays it seems like there are none.  And if there’s no reason to grow up, why shouldn’t every boy want to be Peter Pan?  Of course, that only lasts until he feels the cold breath of time breathing down his neck, but with modern medicine, that can be a looooong time.

Author ID: 7544 | 2/2/2007 11:39 AM CST | #80328


That was Kim’s controversial point about enabling the ghetto types in the Pussification essay.  Women WILL seek power, in whatever form that power takes.  If the only demonstrative of powerful men in our society are the gangster rappers, those will be the ones women will gravitate to, and do whatever is necessary to get their attention.  Unfortunately, that means that young girls find it necessary to adorn themselves with clothing befitting a $2.00 whore and become cat-fighting sluts who fight over these jerks.

We NEED powerful men.  Not to bully us or abuse us, but to make us feel safe and contented and allow us to SLEEP at night. 

I feel a tragic sadness about the plight of young women’s ability to find a strong man who has the balls to be both her protector and her gentle lover.  Men cannot help but be confused by all of the mixed signals. 

End of confusion:  We want powerful men who will take a bullet for us, not put up with any bullshit or touchy-feely nonsense, who will turn into pussycats and coo in our ears at night, and tickle our bellies and rub our shoulders when we’re too emotional or frightened.

0 Author ID: 2 | 2/2/2007 11:44 AM CST | #80330


Another great piece by Mrs. DT on a related topic is Power.  It echoes what she posted about security and respect.

Author ID: 8912 | 2/2/2007 11:47 AM CST | #80331


PS:  I nearly forgot my other point, which is sex.  Sex used to be one of the lures that would draw men into marriage.  In fact, as difficult as this is to believe, as recently as WWII, it was actually a felony in some states to have sex outside of marriage, i.e. cohabitation, fornication and adultery were crimes (and yes, the felonies were prosecuted and people were sent to prison.)

As Achilles points out above, nowadays it’s incredibly easy for any unattached young man to get sex if he wants it.  So if the rewards of marriage have disappeared, while the liabilities remain, and if the rewards of being single remain while the liabilities disappear, is it any wonder that young men are getting turned off of marriage?

Author ID: 7544 | 2/2/2007 11:48 AM CST | #80332


But that is soooo tragic, Staff.  It isn’t like I can’t understand why men would be nervous about marriage, there is plenty of evidence to suggest that women have too much power in this regard now (the power balance shift).

But MY GAWD!

Marriage is such a wonderful thing for men.  That ownership of home, that providing of the hearth and sustenance for a family is so deep a need within his psyche.  Without that he is an animal, lusting after prey, and a desperate and lonely creature… never sated.

0 Author ID: 2 | 2/2/2007 12:01 PM CST | #80334


One of the things that makes me most satisfied in life is knowing I have a wife who will love me when I’m 65+, no matter what.  I am fortunate in that I married a woman who respects me and my interests and even shares in some of them, but yet is feminine and knows that her place is right by my side.  We’ve been married 26 years, and it gets better every year—including the sex.  I’m a lucky man.

Author ID: 803 | 2/2/2007 12:06 PM CST | #80336


True intimacy requires two-way commitment.  And this is a prerequisite for both of TS’ comments.

Author ID: 8728 | 2/2/2007 12:12 PM CST | #80337


Infidel,

TMI.

0 Author ID: 1 | 2/2/2007 12:14 PM CST | #80338


Here we go!

First of all, Achilles; sex is nothing compared to that warm feeling you get when you come home from a hard day busting databases and the best part of your life asks how many gigabytes you crunched today - with a quaver of pride in her man hovering in her voice, regardless of how many gigs got nailed!
Well, not quite. But close.
The bottom line is this, for EITHER side of the male-female gap (and BOY, is there a gap!):
IF you have a mate who appreciates what you do, and SAYS SO, daily, even if it’s just a hug, peck, and ‘I Love You’ while you’re sitting there eating your morning Cheerios, then you have the primary ingredient for a happy relationship - and it doesn’t even have to be heterosexual (but it’s a lot easier to find if it IS hetero!). I have gay friends who have that same caring level of love, and they’ve worked out for a L-O-O-N-N-G time. In my case, Sandy and I are firmly male and female, and that’s as far as we need to take THAT part of the message!
NEVER go to sleep angry at each other; go to bed, sure. But stay awake until everything’s been worked out.
RESPECT each other, and each other’s space, and each other’s goodies - and don’t be afraid to share your own toys with your mate. Sandy knows where the guns are, she is as good with my .357 as I am (if not better - it’s embarrassing!); she can dig into a database damn near as fast and as deep as I can, but I still build them better than she does; we swap off on who does the better cooking - it often depends on the dish; I start the laundry, she keeps it going (QUIT SCREAMING, KIM!).
In short, share the jobs and the toys, and the responsibilities.
And every once in a while, RUB HER FEET!
RUB HIS NECK AND SHOULDERS!

And did you know that a GOOD back-scratch is BETTER than SEX? Try it some time!

Show a woman that you give a good Goddamn, make her aware that while you will NEVER hurt HER, you will KILL anyone else who tries. And most important of all, remember that 90% of ALL intercourse in a marriage/domestic relationship/partnership/etc. is VERBAL, not Sexual!
LISTEN to her, AND talk to her!
COMMUNICATE, STUPID!
It’s amazing what you’ll hear.

Now, if you’ll excuse me, I have to go talk to my wife - or listen to her, whatever.

Jim

Author ID: 8889 | 2/2/2007 12:24 PM CST | #80339


Tech Support,

I am not sure that marriage is such a wonderful thing for men for just some of the reasons I stated before. You mention that “deep need within his psyche” to provide. That is an ingrained trait. However, now it has become virtually unrequited because gender roles are so unsettled. Marriage was used in the past to do a couple of things socially - provide solid proof that a man’s child was his own and provide a structured framework for sex and its usualy results - children. When birth control came along, and the state taking over the role as “protector” and “provider” for both woman and child, the results were entirely predictable which was the decline of marriage. What was overlooked was the other male contributions to the family. So now men are discouraged from being men. I never could understand why the genders couldn’t enjoy their their differnt roles. I guess I am happy doing make things without trying or wanting to make in roads into female roles. The reverse is not true. Modern women seem to want to be men! Argh! This is one thing a man doesn’t need - a woman who wants to be be a man in womans clothes.

With the divorce rate being as high as it is, especially for first timers, and with the deck absolutely stacked against men in court, where men almost ALWAYS lose their assets and with the courts seeming to encourage women to file restraining orders against men to frack up their visitation rights - men have been literally reduced to providing a paycheck.

As a single man, I have a home and am reponsible for a great many things and have very fullfilling relationships with family and friends. I am godfather to many children and stay positively involved in their lives.

Author ID: 7763 | 2/2/2007 12:27 PM CST | #80340


As a twenty-something, single male I feel I am singularly qualified to comment on this issue. Before I continue I’m going to issue a disclaimer. I love women. I would never condone violence being done to a women whether through physical or verbal attack. Now, let’s carry on.

I look at the dating scene I find myself in abject horror. I would say that calling my generation of male’s attitude toward women ‘indifferent’ is, at best, wishful thinking. I would more accurately describe it as contempt. Feminists spent decades trying to end the objectification of women by empowering them, educating them and extricating them from dependence on men. This, they thought, would force men to treat them as people and equals and all would be well.

I fear this has backfired completely. From my perspective, men are objectifying women more completely than ever before. When women were depenent on a man, the man felt responsibiilty to her. His honor as a man was based on how happy and comfortable she was. It was a matter of duty to love and cherish her. When these men became angry with their wives, it was primarily out of love, not hate (with obvious and numerous exceptions). While the system was not perfect and, indeed, limited the choices of women severely, the relationship between men and women was functional. Not anymore.

Men of my generation objectify women almost completely. Knowing that the modern feminist woman has no need for the man beyond sex, the man views her likewise as something to use and throw away. I’ve witnessed countless examples of a man who does want something more from a girl being shut down with laughing condescention. The man learns early on that to get the girl he must convince her he doesn’t want to entrap her in the patriarchy. He must always maintain utter detachment and even cruelty.

Don’t believe me? You are deluding yourself. I see it every day.

Like I said, I love women. It just gets harder and harder to find a woman who loves men.

Author ID: 9494 | 2/2/2007 12:31 PM CST | #80341


Kim,

Note taken.

Author ID: 803 | 2/2/2007 12:34 PM CST | #80342


As John Ross puts it:

Women’s primary asset, fertility, has an expiration date.

This has earned him all sorts of hate mail.  He further goes on to say that women who are no longer fertile MUST bring something to the table that the man does NOT have.

Author ID: 691 | 2/2/2007 12:36 PM CST | #80343


I hit indifferent at 23, seven years ago.  Oddly enough, it made me far more attractive to women.  Sometimes I feel bad for being indifferent, but most of the time, I’m just indifferent about being indifferent.  Of course, this stuff doesn’t happen to men in a vacuum.  As with many of faithful hosts’ comments, all the “manly” qualities work in the longterm on neutral female test subjects.  But real human females have all sorts of lingering issues, like most of us.  Rather than making two halves of a sliced apple come together as one, it’s more like two half eaten apples attempting to fit flush.

I’ve seen examples of healthy, loving, respectful, intimate, long term relationships between adults, but not many.  Most of my associates (including myself) have over-corrected against feminism with such force, most of us aren’t liable to be pulled back to the center any time soon.  The constant bombardment by the feminist/mainstream establishment upon both men and women sure as hell isn’t helping.

Author ID: 917 | 2/2/2007 12:40 PM CST | #80346


Mrs. DT:

I agree completely.  Men need women, and women need men.  We need each other because the whole is greater than the sum of the parts.  It’s built into our genes, and all the social programs in the world, all the “empowerment” in the world won’t change that simple, biological fact.

Author ID: 7544 | 2/2/2007 12:41 PM CST | #80347


Have to agree with that. 

And its ironic, because I’ve heard marriage is actually a statistically safer relationship for women than living with a boyfriend. 

I’d like to be married some day; that’s my idea of a real relationship.  But why should I get married in today’s world?  Many of the women my age who would date me have a kid or two already, more experience than I do, and are just now deciding they want a stable provider.  I’m supposed to be flattered by that?  More divorces are initiated by women; and the courts can take everything you’ve got and everything you ever make.  I’m supposed to sign up for that?  There’s a real feeling among some women that marriage and kids means not having to have sex.  The upside for me there is… what?

Author ID: 9368 | 2/2/2007 12:42 PM CST | #80348


Wow.  Just… wow.

As someone who ended up with old-fashioned values who somehow ended up marrying someone with old-fashioned values…

This thread makes me sad.

Author ID: 122 | 2/2/2007 12:46 PM CST | #80351


Well,

I find it funny, in a highly depressing sort of way, that the statement “women want a strong man in public and teddy bear in bed” is somehow remarkable.

In my retrosexual University education, I regularly lambasted, flambed and ridiculed for opining that something a woman I found ideal would be “ a duchess in public and wanton in private”.  ‘How dare you ask women to be something they are not naturally!’ was the most comon refrain of indignation.

So I got married.  Both of us virigins at wedding, both of us stumbling with the idea of communication between partners.  Both of us grew.  Neither of us think dissolution is an answer to a spat. 

There is more, but one thing that isn’t adressed at, that I once again find highly humorous in a depressing way, if how the idea that the woman is an Ace, slumming around looking for her King.  My wife thought she was a Low Maintenance Woman, because she rarely wore makeup. It took years for me to help her see that coloring her hair, medicines to treat her chronic conditions, and other little things contribute to maintainence.  (Full Disclosure:  I have my needs as well: high speed internet, regular sex, etc.  That is maintainence as well) It may be a side effect of the Feminist Movement that all women have become convinced that they are The Best Things Out There.  They are not.  Their psychoses and personality tics are not sacrosanct.  Neither are the mans.  However, man’s personality traits have been beat down for years and the women’s have been protected or sanctified.

Author ID: 8077 | 2/2/2007 12:46 PM CST | #80352


Saladman,

Your observations are accurate. Things are out-of-balance now between the sexes. Socialism is to blame, yet once again. The male role has been completely rendered impotent in today’s society. Everything from church (at least in mainstream christian churches), to raising a family to education as been co-opted by female domination. Hence we have emascualted religious services, the departments of social services telling men to stay away from their kids, and male kids drugged into become zombies at female dominates schools. This does not bode well for the future of society.

Author ID: 7763 | 2/2/2007 12:49 PM CST | #80353


“End of confusion:  We want powerful men who will take a bullet for us, not put up with any bullshit or touchy-feely nonsense, who will turn into pussycats and coo in our ears at night, and tickle our bellies and rub our shoulders when we’re too emotional or frightened.”

TS, I’ve heard that so many times.  But we can’t always shift as needed.  A guy may need their no touchy-feely emotional BS side in the day to handle problems at work, but it can be hard to come home and become the touchy-feely empathic pussycat women need at night.  Because we have a hard time or are unable to make this shift, we get called “stoic” or get accused of bottling our emotions up. 
Whereas many women have emotions that can turn on a dime.  I hate to call it emotional instability because it has a connotation of mental illness, but that’s what it is.  And “emotional” is one of the things a guy will accuse a girl of being.
I wish each sex could realize these things about each other and find some way to deal with it.

Also, the Sexual Revolution -specifically the increasing acceptance of gays & lesbians- hasn’t helped things either, IMHO.  (Warning: following conclusions based upon personal experience; YMMV).  I believe that not all women out there IDing themselves as lesbians or bisexuals really have a sexual attraction for their own sex, but are drawn into such relationships because they may be more emotionally supportive relationships.  Obviously this is not helpful to guys.  And on the other side, I’m hearing of more and more women who have gay male friends because such a relationship provides an emotional support, but then becoming dis-satisfied with the straight men they date because these men aren’t able to provide the same level of emotional support the gay male friend does.  And obviously, this isn’t helpful for the guys.  I’m really not sure if there’s a solution to this problem, but let’s just say it can be REALLY frustrating.

Oh, and I LOVE the feedback loop that has developed from feminism.  Like Kim mentioned, feminist social policy tells us men “you are bad, and you have to keep away” and the laws & rules put up in place to enforce it makes us men indifferent to women.  Then aggrieved, and we get the feeling, “Why date a girl, put up with all her clinging nonsense, when you can hire a lap dancer to come to your frat house?” Ergo, guy goes out to a strip club and gets a lap dance.  And of course, this infuriates the feminists more.  She believes that the man is still the barbarian she became a feminist to fight against, when in reality the man is just responding counter to the crap the feminist has put out.  While whole markets have opened up specifically catering to each sex and relishing the difference of each sex (think of the Burger King “I am man, hear me roar” commercial) feminists think we’re still in the Dark Ages because of industries, products and ad campaigns which cater specifically to men.

Of course, we could easily end the war between the sexes by going the route of 1984.  Claim the orgasm is detrimental to the State, start up Anti-Sex Leagues in which girls are convinced not to have sex and instead procreate via artifical insemination, defusing the problems of relationships and marriages as neither will be needed for procreation.  Make everyone love Big Brother so they will not feel emotionally abandoned by their partners.  As for security, that’s what MiniLuv is for.

Better stop here.

Author ID: 1257 | 2/2/2007 12:57 PM CST | #80354


“I love women. It just gets harder and harder to find a woman who loves men.”

Quote of the day.

0 Author ID: 1 | 2/2/2007 01:02 PM CST | #80355


I used to tell my female classmates that they deserved to be on the cover of a national magazine.  The silly creatures thought that this was a compliment.  Since I considered their attitudes utterly mercenary (as in “No money + no car = no status, and therefore, no girlfriend” if you were a guy) I was thinking that they belonged in Soldier of Fortune.  I could have even written the article: “America’s Young Women: A New Secret Weapon Against the Commies!”

I am the last person on earth to be able to point fingers at anybody at all for being greedy---heck, I was on the Take at twelve!  What I despised was their hypocrisy and their muddy thinking; if asked, they’d have said that of course they didn’t judge guys by how much money they had, or whether or not they had a car.

H.L. Mencken, in In Defense of Women (written in 1918!) said that the nascent movement of women toward economic and social equality had a nasty surprise waiting---that once men stopped seeing women as helpless, they’d start looking at them a lot less romantically and sentimentally.  As usual, Mencken was right.  Heckydarn, considering how far the pendulum has swung to the other extreme (as in divorce laws that were written to heavily favor women back in the days when women really couldn’t get jobs staying on the books in a time when most women can and do work) he was, if anything, cautious.

While I feel for women who don’t enjoy sex, I want to ask them if they’ve ever tried telling the men in their lives what they want and what feels good?  Men can’t read minds, and most men would rather please their partner than themselves.  Getting past programming about “sex is dirty, icky and nasty and you should only do it with someone you love” might also help a lot. 

As for unskilled men---I’ve said for years that it would be better for teenage boys to “learn the ropes” with a nice older woman who knows how to teach them how to please a woman.  It isn’t a skill that comes with one’s first shave, one’s driver’s license, or on a particular birthday.

Author ID: 7388 | 2/2/2007 01:12 PM CST | #80356


Quote of the day.

I’d feel honored if it weren’t so true and mortifying.  I’m nearly 27 years old and I have met maybe two women I’d consider marriage material.  Guess what?  They were both ‘old-fashioned.’ I fear, if this continues, we’re in very big trouble.

Author ID: 9494 | 2/2/2007 01:25 PM CST | #80359


I think I now know why older men like me so much:  I don’t attempt to castrate them.

Reading all of this has been most depressing.

Author ID: 2090 | 2/2/2007 01:56 PM CST | #80365


I have to admit that I approach of lot of this like ScottS.  I have been truly fortunate in finding Kim, but I will add that I met lots of men in my life that were like him, just not as compatible as him and a match for me.  I LIKE men!  What is not to like?  Why would I feel threatened or fearful of all men? 

I have also been on the other side of this (without going into the details AGAIN and it falls in the TMI category).  I’m sure there are men who I dated who thought of me as the worst banshee they’ve ever come across (I had the heated phone calls and “you’re a bitch” Dear Jane letters to prove it).  It is hard to get rid of someone you don’t want to date anymore, and it is equally difficult for both sides. So quit getting so serious and invested so quickly!

But this idea that people are not dating I think is the biggest problem.  I fight this continually with the kids, their being so easily duped into thinking that relationship making and future mate finding happens in the span of 2 hours, like it does in the movies.  You have to WORK at it.  You also have to date A LOT.  You have to date lots and lots of people AT THE SAME TIME, not getting too serious with any single one of them, until you know what you like and don’t like, and what works for you.  Young people get too invested, too physical, too fast, with the inability to distinguish compatibility/love with infatuation.  And I know that dating sucks.  Divorce and child custody battles are worse!

I am continually astounded by the absolute blind-spots people have in finding someone that is their proper mate, ie, compatible in the important areas.  I am further astounded that I get labeled as some sort of meanie or way too calculating in my approach for treating the bonding of two people as the most important aspect of their lives, that has the potential of causing them the greatest hardships and despair if they choose badly, and the greatest peace and happiness for choosing wisely.  We select computers with more deference and diligence than we do mates.  People talk to their friends and seek the advice of others when choosing a computer, but for some reason, there this off limits approach to the tried and tested method of DATING and getting your peers and parents involved in asking “Is this person right for me?” And when you are absolutely certain this is the perfect person for you, you STILL have to wait for at least six more months to make sure. 

That’s what engagements were for...to verify, with a commitment to fidelity and exclusivity BY AN OFFER OF FUTURE MARRIAGE--a test period to see if that is the person you want to spend the rest of your life with.  No exclusivity should occur BEFORE the engagement period; meaning, that ONLY when an offer of marriage is made do you take yourself out of the dating pool.  That period was not supposed to be the wedding planning phase.  That’s putting the cart before the horse!  If, after the engagement period, you are still certain you want to marry, THEN the wedding planning can begin, in YEAR TWO.

There is a person out there for everyone--everyone who has the ability to show love and care, and the strength of character to get their ego and their fears of risk out of the way.  If you haven’t found the perfect match, you are looking in the wrong place, or you need to take a thorough assessment of what you’re bringing to the bargaining table, and increase your marketability by improving yourself.

What is truly sad is that there is this vehemence of men by women, and women by men.  I see evidence for some of the reasons.  There are men I think are horrible, just as there are women that are horrible.  But some/most/many men are WONDERFUL people. Ditto for some/most/many women.  If you truly do hate women/men, then don’t get married, and for heaven’s sakes, don’t date either (and get yourself to a priest/rabbi/psychiatrist).  Don’t take a decent product offering out of the pool to find the happiness they are seeking while you get your shit in order or to appease your temporary need for a physical relationship.  It is a coldness/heartlessness of a sort that I cannot quite get my head around.

I swear I should start a match-making service, something like eShadchan, where my opinion on the compatibility of a partner is FINAL.

0 Author ID: 2 | 2/2/2007 02:02 PM CST | #80367


Techno,

It isn’t the sex itself that requires training.  It is what happens before that is the problem.  We’re not talking about the Big O here or how to please a man or woman once IN bed.  We’re talking about what drives a woman to want to go there and be there in the first place.

0 Author ID: 2 | 2/2/2007 02:06 PM CST | #80368


Tech Support,

In light of the ongoing discussion, it has to become apparent why several men, even those you weren’t interested in, were unhappy to see you go.  You like men.  That’s like winning the lottery!

Author ID: 9494 | 2/2/2007 02:10 PM CST | #80369


two words..

third world born wives.

Author ID: 7035 | 2/2/2007 02:15 PM CST | #80370


“or you need to take a thorough assessment of what you’re bringing to the bargaining table, and increase your marketability by improving yourself.”

This may be a part of the problem on both sides of the aisle.  That statement is not something that you hear very often in our culture.  Instead we’re told to do our own thing, be true to ourselves, etc.  There may be a little to that, in that trying to change another person isn’t a useful strategy, but in addition we’re encouraging people not to improve themselves.

In fact this may be something I need to work on personally.

Author ID: 9368 | 2/2/2007 02:15 PM CST | #80371


LOL Norton.

You mean “ThirdWorldBorn Wives.”

0 Author ID: 1 | 2/2/2007 02:18 PM CST | #80372


Yeah, Norton, those imported Vietnamese women look better all the time.  Heh.

Saladman,

Obviously it is critical to improve yourself and constantly bring more to the table.  This is why I’m in school and quit smoking and cut back on the drinking, etc. 

Still, it doesn’t matter how perfect a mousetrap you build if you’re house is infested with cockroaches.

Author ID: 9494 | 2/2/2007 02:29 PM CST | #80374


Yeah, Norton, those imported Vietnamese women look better all the time.  Heh.

Saladman,

Obviously it is critical to improve yourself and constantly bring more to the table.  This is why I’m in school and quit smoking and cut back on the drinking, etc. 

Still, it doesn’t matter how perfect a mousetrap you build if you’re house is infested with cockroaches.

Author ID: 9494 | 2/2/2007 02:29 PM CST | #80375


It’s because of what feminism has done to American women that many men have been going for “mail order brides”.  But there’s danger in that also, in that there are those women who just want to come to America and get their green cards and then get divorced.  Then there’s the problem of the women becoming americanized. I’ve heard guys marrid to some of the women talk about how they become feminized after a few years. And things go down hill.

Author ID: 7019 | 2/2/2007 02:39 PM CST | #80379


And no, that comment in no way means to imply that women are mice or cockroaches.  Well, uber-feminists maybe a little.

Author ID: 9494 | 2/2/2007 02:41 PM CST | #80381


Um, Is there a missing italics close tag in this article?

Author ID: 7909 | 2/2/2007 02:52 PM CST | #80383


Sex is really just the canary in the mineshaft of our marriages.  When the husband feels respected by his wife he longs to be intimate with her (physically and emotionally).  When the wife is loved by the husband she desires the same intimacy.  If either breaks that cycle even marginally, the lack of respect (perceived or real) causes the husband to react in an unloving manner to his wife.  His wife responds by acting disrespectfully to her husband.  Lather, rinse, repeat.  Each iteration increases the level of disrespect/unloving actions.  One of the two must respond by deliberately breaking the cycle and de-escalating the situation.  I fear for a couple that has stopped having sex regularly.

After reading both Kim’s and TS’s essays I think the problem really comes down to women want men to be good, but society is training them to be nice.  Women are hard wired to detect good men.

A good man is like the ones TS describes in “Kim’s South Africa”.  The man who isn’t afraid to drag an abusive man into a dark alley and hand him a proper beating.  A good man stands up for his convictions with passion.  A good man reasons with his mind and is able to admit when he is wrong.  A good man lets his wife into the most vulnerable areas of his psyche so she can truly become his compliment.  A good man is humble, but assured of his abilities.  A good man provides the environment where his wife can flourish so she can be everything he needs her to be.

A nice man can’t stand the thought of confrontation.  A nice man settles for the emotional abuse of “I think you’re a really nice guy, but...” and only try harder to be nicer to the next woman by debasing himself further.  A nice man can’t let his spouse into his heart because he’s too afraid of being hurt.  A nice man settles for a job that sucks because he’s terrified of the confrontation needed to make things better.

Nice is pussified and yet can still find ways to be cocky.  Nice can’t bear up under pressure because there is no foundation.  A nice man is an incomplete man.  A nice man shudders when his passion is finally ignited and people respond with “tell us how you really feel”.  He’s afraid of his strength and his convictions and lives in abject fear of the latter.  Much of post-modern philosophy is a result of an attempt to codify what being nice really is all about.

I truly believe that women are fine tuned to know a good man when they see him.  I think women understand at a very basic level what makes a good man.  What feminism has brought into the picture is the demand of the state to enforce being good.  Since being good can be highly subjective, we get a cheap imitation disguised as the real thing.  For example, Political Correctness makes a man sound good, but in reality its just a veneer.

I think women do know what they want both in and out of bed.  They struggle with the seeming contradiction of wanting a strong man to protect them and the feminist demand that they be self-reliant.  Men are left confused by the struggle we see in the women in our lives.  Conversely, the women in our lives see the internal struggle of who we are and what society tells us we should be.  Women want a man she can respect, but men are trained to behave in ways not worthy of that respect (nice instead of good).  We want their respect and they want our love.  A great deal must be overcome in order to start that cycle and that is an unfortunate development in our society.

In the end, I love my wife, and I know I have her respect.  She is my perfect compliment.  When I married her, my vows were permanent and binding.  Not a day has gone by where I wouldn’t do it again in a heart beat.

Author ID: 424 | 2/2/2007 03:24 PM CST | #80384


Maybe that’s why Bush is letting all the mexicans come across the border, he’s hoping to import some REAL women for his single constituents!!

OK that was bad I admit it… but admit it, you at least smirked at that one, right?

RH

Author ID: 8464 | 2/2/2007 03:29 PM CST | #80385


Jon -
Interesting.  That “Nice vs. Good” comparision keeps coming up.  In the Chronicles of Narnia, Aslan was said to be good, but not safe.  I think nice and safe are often equated; people, especially women, want nice, but they need good.

Author ID: 8728 | 2/2/2007 03:38 PM CST | #80387


boys are taught by their fathers to respect and cherish women.

Yup.  It’s also cultural too.  When was the last time you heard rap extolling those virtues?  You wind up with people who act completely different to a woman when they’re around their friends, or who “they’re hangin’ wit” than when they’re alone with a woman.

Author ID: 2187 | 2/2/2007 05:34 PM CST | #80396


That was one of the things Kim and I talked about offline, Mike.  The idea that so few men will demonstrate intimacy to their wives/girlfriends in front of other men.

The image that comes up for me is the James Bond, suave type, who is gentle and flirtatious to a woman, while in the company of lots of other men.

Real men aren’t afraid to be flirtatious and gentle to women in front of their mates.  If they’re worried about coming off as a wimp, they are.

0 Author ID: 2 | 2/2/2007 06:08 PM CST | #80398


Sometimes I wonder if this feminist social engineering that Kim discusses (as pernicious as it is) can be held responsible for this indifference that men feel towards women. First of all, I’m, sure there was a lot of indifference going on before feminism. Also, I personally have known close to ten women (all with college degrees and some with advanced degrees) who have given up their careers to raise kids and don’t regret it one bit. Heck my wife would if only she had married better.

And for those women who remain brainwashed by the feminist ideal despite the heavy doses of reality they receive in their 30s, well, if not for feminism, they’d brainwashed by something else: socialism, progressivism, extremist religion, etc.

My experience is that people always try to be who they are despite whatever social pressures are placed on them.

Kim is 100% right about intimacy, BTW.

Author ID: 7619 | 2/2/2007 06:31 PM CST | #80400


Much interesting, and, as usual, very thought provoking. Thanks, Kim. And, thanks to Tech Support, too.

After a couple decades of “wedded bliss” I found myself single again, and have come to rather enjoy it. Not that I don’t enjoy the company of women, I relish it. I just can’t find any worth my time. They seem to fall into a few categories: divorced themselves, and desperate for a replacement mate; immature; above it all, and not taking life that seriously; married to their careers. I would have to describe my current attitude toward women as one of lack of patience.

My big show-stopper issue? Trust and respect. I am a man, I have a pretty good idea what men are about, what is expected of us and I have a real good idea of just who I am. If we’re sharing a closet it’s because I’ve agreed to always cover your back, no matter what, “us” - as in “you and me” - always comes first, and it’s the two of us against the world. I don’t plan on taking a bullet for you, because it’s my job to make sure we’re never in that deep a spot to begin with, and give the other guy his bullet 500 meters before he knows we’re here. And, if I take the bullet I fail - I won’t be around to protect, provide, and love, and those are the primary responsibilities for a man. But, if it does come to that, and there’s no other way out, I’ll be behind the wall at the Alamo while you’re hauling your ass to safety. That’s the way it works.

In return, I want the same thing; you always have my back, and always means always.  Don’t try to turn me into what you think you want; neither my mother nor my lieutenant succeeded at that, you won’t either. To attempt it means you don’t respect me and who I am. This isn’t a hobby, it’s life, and life is complicated, especially when it involves two personalities. Except for bedrock principles, I’m willing to give some, because that makes life easier, and more enjoyable. I expect no less of my partner.

And therein lies the rub; my experience is that many, perhaps most, women today don’t understand that: a) there are some bedrock principles, and; b) they need to make some adjustments, too. And, those are real adjustments, not “giving in for now” with the idea of extracting payback later.  I don’t recall that being the predominant attitude 25 years ago when I was single the first time, but it seems pretty common now. Which is strange, because many of these women were the girls three to four grades behind us back then.

I’ve talked to a number of men in my age group and similar matrimonial situation, and the sentiment is pretty much the same: we’ve become pretty comfortable with our environment, and aren’t looking to change it much because we can’t see sufficient value in doing so. In short, the women are going to have to come back to where we are, we’re not putting together an expedition to hunt for them.

Author ID: 8059 | 2/2/2007 06:42 PM CST | #80402


Hey all I can say is, I don’t give a rats behind if the sons ever get married, but the daughter best be.  I think the current state of this country is the death of the free world.  It sounds strange but women are the moderaters of society, when they fail, all is lost.  Taking the role of men is is loser, for them and the males.

Author ID: 8294 | 2/2/2007 07:15 PM CST | #80403


I swear I should start a match-making service, something like eShadchan, where my opinion on the compatibility of a partner is FINAL.
Tech Support on 02/02 at 03:02 PM

Where do I sign up?
The few dates I’ve been on have all ended the same. 
“You’re nice, but you aren’t mean/damaged/stupid/asshole’ish enough”.

Chivalry ain’t dead yet, though I suspect I’m one of it’s few young practitioners.  For some reason, the closer I get to the F*** it stage, the more attractive I become.  Gawd I hate trying to break into the dating game.

From a website long since forgotten:


A woman has a close male friend. This means that he is probably interested in her, which is why he hangs around so much. She sees him strictly as a friend. This always starts out with, you’re a great guy, but I don’t like you in that way. This is roughly the equivalent for the guy of going to a job interview and the company saying, You have a great resume, you have all the qualifications we are looking for, but we’re not going to hire you. We will, however, use your resume as the basis for comparison for all other applicants. But, we’re going to hire somebody who is far less qualified and is probably an alcoholic. And if he doesn’t work out, we’ll hire somebody else, but still not you. In fact, we will never hire you. But we will call you from time to time to complain about the person that we hired.

Author ID: 6692 | 2/2/2007 08:22 PM CST | #80404


ALL these comments are worth reading: surely an indication (as if I needed one) that the people that make up the shooting world are a diverse group of decent, rational, and admirable human beings with valuable insights into the human condition.

The BIG question is: how do I get the WOMEN in my life to read this?

Author ID: 7232 | 2/2/2007 08:53 PM CST | #80405


It was my misfortune to have two younger sisters back in the early 70s.  I say misfortune only in the sense that seeing behind the lady’s room door during the dating game is the third member of the list of things that one should not witness without a strong stomach, the other two being politics and sausage making.  So I said to myself, self, I said, there’s no way in @#$% that I’m ever going to be subjected to that kinda @$%$LI@^ from anyone, ever.  Did actually get with the program about 15years later when I met wife-unit.  Good thing, too.

Author ID: 6681 | 2/2/2007 09:50 PM CST | #80407


With all respect to Kim and T.S.’s original essays, the comments of themselves in this thread would put paid to 99% of all collegiate sociolgy courses.

Especially the foul and accursed categories of womyn’s studies, et-al.

I am honored to be counted amongst you all.

And I am blessed by the love of a woman who is by God a woman! And not a petulant overgrown child. 

Far too late in my life as to the ideal, but I’ll be thankful for the gifts so bestowed, regardless.

Sendarious; my advice, sir.  Do what I do.  Sit side by side with her (we each have our own laptop), and share what you’re reading with her.

Tonight, I read aloud several of these comments to Iris, often with a tear in my eye and my voice breaking.

Espeically from The Mad Yank’s comment of 01:24 PM and Christopher Ross’ comment of 01:31 PM. 

Many other equally powerful thoughts from various and sundry commenters follow, but by then Iris has retired for the night, and I soon follow. 

But she knows from this all the more, how very much I love her, and the depth of her meaning to me in my heart, life and world.

What remains is this.

The Nation of Riflemen is the finest group of people I’ve the honor to know, or hope to know.

I’m looking forward to the first weekend in June.  I can’t wait to meet more of ye.

Jim
Sloop New Dawn
Galveston, TX

Author ID: 2853 | 2/2/2007 10:45 PM CST | #80408


A few comments:

1) Functional MRI’s show that the arousal centers in the male brain are stimulated by pictorial depictions of sex (surprise!) What has the same effect on women? Extended, engaged conversation with a male. Boys, even if you have to fake it, listen to them and engage them. Learn how to converse. Look them in the eyes.  Learn to give the visual cues of interest (raising eyebrows slightly, etc.).

Learning to play guitar helps, too.

2) Men are giving up because our culture holds men to impossibly high standards combined with utter contempt. Television is full of dumb lunks and their oh-so-very-wise mother-wives. And women buy into this garbage. Men are constantly told (even in these comments!) what they have to do to please and attract and hold on to women. Meanwhile, the message women get is that they are just fine the way they are, and anybody who says any different is imposing some “male standards of beauty” or “patriarchal oppression” on them. So you have men frustrated by constant, vague, contradictory and ever-changing demands (face it, women DO NOT know what they want) while they are being offered as a reward the company of this country’s most indulged, spoiled, coddled and demanding generation of women ever. God help me if I wasn’t married, because it must be hell out there.

Author ID: 1256 | 2/2/2007 10:46 PM CST | #80409


Where’s all our Forum ladies?  Morning Glory, Mok.......?

Author ID: 372 | 2/3/2007 12:28 AM CST | #80410


For YEARS I struggled with getting dates. I was brought up to be “very respectful” of women and to “be nice” and in general to exhbit ass-kissing behavior towards women. My parents are from a different generation - one in which gender roles were defined and there wasn’t as much overt gender hate. Might have worked back then. I was born in the late early sixties - just as all the feminist shit really started to bloom. And although my parents are quite conservative, bottom line is that I was raised not knowing how to deal with women in the modern era.

Not knowing any different, I thought the way to attract women was to “be nice” to them, never argue with them, always buy them things, always pay for dinner...and well you guys know the rest. This is what my parents taught me. It seemed for a long time, all I ever received in return was a shit sandwich - the “Lets Just Be Friends” stuff.

Been there, done that.  In high school and college, it amazed me that girls turned me down in favour of the “bad boys”, some of whom were downright abusive.
So, at age 21ish, I stopped being a nice guy.  I stayed a good guy, but not always a nice one. Finished college, did the military thing, became a modest success.  And it worked.
Today, most women age 50-75 like me(I’m polite and open doors for them).  Women 18-35 are confused by me(I mostly ignore them).  And the 36 to late 40’s divorcees, who got smart and ditched their sorry-ass “bad boy” husbands years ago and are looking for a good guy, often flirt with me, some of them seriously.  Sometimes I flirt back.  While fondling my wedding ring.  Move along, ladies.  That ring says: “Private property. No poaching or trespassing.”

Dr. Laura is quite right when she says: “A good man may be hard to find, but he’s very simple to keep.”

Author ID: 372 | 2/3/2007 01:12 AM CST | #80411


I read once that 90+ percent of divorces are initiated by the women, not the men.  And of course, these days accusations of abuse on the man’s part is standard in a divorce case.  And those prenup agreements apparently can get the chop any time some judge wants to chop it.

I can’t tell you how many times I have felt an interest in someone, but never made a try at it because that percentage came to mind when I considered it.

I’d not thought of it in such stark terms before.  But the posts about how feminism has caused men to coldly conduct risk assessment, to consider what will the woman bring to the table that makes going after them worth it are right on, that’s how I viewed it.  I’ve considered what will I get in return for giving up my spare time and most hobbies I’ve done, for the burden of starting and raising a family on my wallet.  And I’ve decided over and over again that the hassles of dating, relationships, and the emotional and financial risk of marriage and having kids just didn’t look worth it to me.

And risking it with someone that will walk in the door already hauling at least one set of previous baggage/problems has been, frankly even less worth it to me.

Maybe if I were rich and the burden of alimony and child support would not be so much that I could not afford to have another try at it I might have viewed things differently risk-wise.  But I’m not rich.  To me, one divorced wife and kids means the difference between owning a home like I have now and being able to spend money on hobbies, and living in a camper at the trailor park with no spare money at all.

If Miss Right by sheer chance walks into my life tomorrow and I lose my mind and chase her down that’ll be fine with me, but I don’t and haven’t gone looking around for it to happen.

Now, if viewing it that way and just not seeking a long term relationship and the personal sacrifices/risks it would entail makes me selfish and self-centered by placing more value on my hobbies and spare time than on a relationship, so be it.  At least I’ve been honest about it and didn’t get anyone pregnant.

Author ID: 8495 | 2/3/2007 02:55 AM CST | #80412


And another thought.  With more and more women going to college, and with what we conservatives know passes for “education” “intelligence” and being “intellectual” at your average university these days.

Well, I remember how messed in the head I thought most college girls were about politics and ethics and such when I finally finished getting my degree in the mid 90s.  Most of them loved Slick Willy, for instanse, thought he was a great guy.  I’ve had a very good friend, ex-navy guy and 6 years younger then me who decided to get himself a degree too, he graduated this past year and from his own experience, the PC is far worse only a decade later on the same campus and the college women are even more messed in the head liberal wise.  He ought to know, he tried dating more than a few of them.

So educated women are turning their noses up at blue collar men.  So how many blue and white collar men are these days and in the future not going to waste their time on educated women because they don’t want to deal with all the crap they’ve been taught in their feminised university?

Author ID: 8495 | 2/3/2007 03:11 AM CST | #80413


The quality of sex and intimacy in a relationship depends on the availability of a Lady and a Gentleman. Two overused and often misunderstood terms. My wife is a Lady. I aspire to be a Gentleman.

Author ID: 112 | 2/3/2007 05:38 AM CST | #80415


Many of the women my age who would date me have a kid or two already, more experience than I do, and are just now deciding they want a stable provider.  I’m supposed to be flattered by that?

--Saladman

It is bad for men to look at women as sex objects (a misdescription for admiring a woman’s beauty and being attracted to her) because it is sexist.  It is significant that it is not considered bad for a woman to look at a man as a “Success object”. There is not even a real term for it. 

This might be the whole key to the strained marriages. When low fat and high fiber came out as so healthful, some people began eating food that was so low salt and so low fat and so high fiber as to be inedible. A girl decides that it’s now time to have a family, so she wants a fellow who is a good provider, regardless of whether she is or ever was attracted to that sort, and then kind of grits her teeth and “gutsballs it through” . No wonder afterwards the relationship dries up because the fellow finds intense and relentless pressure to always be different. He wasn’t the model she really wanted to buy.

Author ID: 2303 | 2/3/2007 07:31 AM CST | #80426


Schip,

You can trust that I am just as hard, or harder, on women regarding these things.  It is just that here there are more men so the conversation naturally is addressed to the men.

The point isn’t that men are doing something wrong.  The point is that men are not acting like men.  There are statements that “we are getting mixed signals” and that is what is wrong.  There are no mixed signals.  Women want in men what they have always wanted in men.  Nothing has changed.  That’s the point.  NOTHING has changed, despite 60 years of wrong-headed militant feminism and multiculturalism. 

Here’s how it (used) to work:  You behave like a gentleman, woo us, show us that you are interested.  We will respond.  If eventually that turns more serious, we will provide you the comforts of home and children, and sex.  In return, you promise to provide for us and protect us.  Tit-for-tat arrangement.

The awful [removed]but true): “Why have a cow when you can get the milk for free” is the source of the conflict today.  There is way too much free milk on the market, even if most of it is sour and curdled.  And that doesn’t screw it up for men (directly).  Women and children are the ones who have been the most damaged because of it.  Now some might say that women have brought this on themselves, and I’ve agree with a lot of that, but what about the nice girl who behaves herself? 

If I were to devise a plot that would get men all the free milk they could want, without any of the costs of keeping a cow, I couldn’t have come up with a better one than feminism.

The purpose of all this formalization of the relationship between men and women was to protect the innocents in all of this… the children.  But I’m not talking about “For The Children” in the twisted way the multiculturalists have taken it (and abused its meaning).  Children need (and deserve) the stability that marriage provides.  And, if women would get their heads out of their asses, they’d realize that it was there to protect them, and provide them the stability and safety they’re so often seeking between the sheets of magazine covers.

Men ARE providers so suggesting that there isn’t a term to describe women seeking that is kinda strange.  It is exactly what women are supposed to be doing and what we are biologically hard-wired to do.

The power that women are looking for in a mate is the demonstrable of being able to protect/provide. 

There are damaged goods in the market, and the other factors in our society (large, anonymous populations) make finding the right mate very difficult.  Straying into the “too much information” category, I was one of those who got involved with “damaged goods.” I was his third (abused) wife.  Had we lived in the type of society and structure that existed 100 years ago, he would never have been able to get a second wife, let alone a third.  The words on the street would have been, “Avoid.” And if the word on the street didn’t get to the second one, her brother/father would have taken the bastard out. 

I won’t go into detail because that WOULD be too much information, but suffice it say that “I can’t come around anymore because now your mother has guns” are not exactly the words of a man who knows he’s been a falsely accused angel.

Men’s forums don’t exactly vet their membership.  A lot of men complaining about “false” accusations of abuse ARE abusive.  Ex was a frequent commenter at men’s forums, getting lots of sympathy from other men. 

That doesn’t mean that there aren’t horrible women who made false accusations, but it would be just as foolish to presume the men are all innocent as to proclaim them all guilty.

0 Author ID: 2 | 2/3/2007 08:22 AM CST | #80431


Finally getting a chance to catch up and read the two wonderful posts by Kim and Connie, and I couldn’t agree more. We’re paying for the counterculture of the 1960s and then 70s. I think it’s helped to screw up a lot of people . Fortunately, there are still shining beacons out there, and maybe the pendulum can swing back. I hope so, for mankind’s sake, and for a mostly happy one, at that. At least in our own country. The agenda to turn us into Euroweenies is very disturbing. I’m getting a little off-track though.

Rusty, that post about the woman and close male friend… heh. That’s how Mr. Mo and I started out. It was a bit one-sided, yes (he had more amorous feelings than I did); he really was my ‘bestest’ male friend (and a few years later, my best friend period--even though I still thought of him platonically) .  We had our first date when I was 16. He told me years later that he knew right then that he would marry me some day. No WAY was I ready, of course. I’m sure glad he was bestowed with patience, cuz no one can say we jumped into marriage after 9 yrs. of on-and-off dating/hanging out.  During that time, I had a lot of growing up to do, living on my own, etc.  What still perplexes and delights me to this day, is how in literally a few days I could go from thinking of him as my best buddy, “He’ll make some girl really happy one day, and she’d better appreciate him, dammit!” to wanting to spend the rest of my life with him and never having a doubt since that life-changing New Year’s Eve.
All I can figure is that we had such a solid foundation, and the good Lord knew when the timing was right.

Author ID: 1876 | 2/3/2007 08:38 AM CST | #80435


Hmm. Well, maybe some women are, Teebone. Not this gal, though. I was always drawn to the smart ones The bad boys scared me!

Author ID: 1876 | 2/3/2007 08:52 AM CST | #80441


Going back to third world born women.

First of all, its not necessary to import one, there’s plenty right here.

I wanted to say in the original post that when I was looking for a wife way back when, I got along best with foreign born women, I think because their values matched mine more than the american women I knew.  I didn’t say that because I didn’t want to invoke the stereotype of a submissive asian woman.  That’s not what I meant but I didn’t know how to explain it.

Once you realize that to have a good marriage the husband and wife both need to do whatever they can to keep the other happy.  There are compromises and you have to be willing to compromise a whole lot more than you really want to.  (I still miss the motorcycles).  Your job, is to keep the wife happy, whatever that may take.  The only exception is when you are absolutely certain that your way is necessary for the good of the family, not just for yourself.  If you and your spouse have the same basic value system that should work and if american women don’t share your value system you need to look elsewhere.

My wife, by the way, is lao-vietnamese and is not in the least submissive.  In fact from what I’ve seen in lao families, the wife is always the boss.  We’ve been married for 23 pretty good years and have two great kids, (both eagle scouts).

Author ID: 7035 | 2/3/2007 09:37 AM CST | #80444


Jim S.;

Thanks for the stroked in your posting; it’s nice to know I can positively influence people, especially when I’ll speaking from the heart.

This is a VERY interesting thread; I’m glad I chimed in on it. I’m also very ENCOURAGED to find so many people who agree with most of my ideas about marriage and women.

Even if it DID take me THREE TRIES to get it right; Sandy says she got it right the first time, but I say the jury is still out; it’s only been eleven years, I still have time to screw it up. Not that I’m PLANNING to screw it up, but hey…

One problem is that. SO MANY feminazis are out there, that I an alomost agree with a comment I read in a book once:

“Women. If they didn’t screw, there’d be a bounty on ‘em.”

I don’t quite agree with that, but only because I married Sandy, and I’ve known so many people like TS. I thank both of you for reaffirming my faith in the other half of the human race.

And, by the way, for the ‘nice’ guys out there, and for the feminazis, one thing I would remind all of you:

Population-wise, there are more women than men in the U.S., and more inbound every day, between birth rates and immigration, both legal and otherwise. Do you -nazis REALLY want to have to compete against the Ladies for those of us who are available Gentlemen? Go ahead, it’ll just make it easier for us to find the “GOOD” women; not all of them are taken.

Sorry guys, Kim and I HAVE our Ladies; go get your own!

Jim

Author ID: 8889 | 2/3/2007 10:21 AM CST | #80448


Tech Support @ 9:22- You tell it like it is! 

My take on the girls who like “bad boys” is that somewhere in her head, a girl believes that the guy will treat her differently than he treats everyone else, and she’s turned on by that.  She sees his behavior and attitude as signs of power.  Then, if she gets the guy, she’ll either be surprised and miserable that he treats her in the same poor manner, or else she’ll begin attempting to “change him.” If she succeeds in her attempts, she will lose interest in him, now that the elements she was attracted to are gone.  Girls, you cannot have the hots for a “bad boy” who drives a motorcycle fast and goes skydiving, and then take those activities away because they’re not “safe.”

I like men who do things “with balls,” and that’s the element that feminism is trying to get rid of.  It’s all been said before- the ritalin, girl-centered education, metrosexualism, sensitivity training (JHC on a broomstick!).  Why could I listen to Bernstein conduct Brahms with Vienna every day for the rest of my life?  Because it’s done with balls (and Lenny was gay).  The best artists, writers, athletes and thinkers are great because they performed with balls.  I will never, ever understand why so many women want to take that away.

Author ID: 2090 | 2/3/2007 10:37 AM CST | #80450


The best artists, writers, athletes and thinkers are great because they performed with balls.  I will never, ever understand why so many women want to take that away.

AnnaD;

Because of people like Gloria Steinem.
Because of people like Hillary Clinton.
Because of people like Movie Critics, and Literary Critics, and Music Critics, and Political Commentators.

People who can’t DO it, so they criticize it - usually negatively.
People who can’t tolerate ANYONE who has the talent and drive to create, the intellect to create something worthwhile, and the courage to tell critics, including Mrs. Grundy, to go take a flying leap off a tall bridge, a long walk of a short dock, and an airborne intercourse with a motivated pastry!

Give me Heley Gurley Brown over Gloria Steinem; Give me Bill over Hillary (no pun intended, although if he HAD been more often, then Monica would never have found the underside of that desk, I believe); Give me Gene Roddenberry or George Lucas over Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert, William Faulkner or Joan Collins over some NYT jackass whose name I never even remembered, John Lennon or Ludvig von Beethoven over some other NYT jackass, and even George Dubya or Bill Clinton over Sam Donaldson or Bob Schieffer (and I like Bob Schieffer).

People who are willing to lay it on the line, be it their soul in creativity, their life in combat, or their heart in love, are FAR SUPERIOR to the wussies who will stand back and knock someone ELSE for doing it and not meeting the wussie’s standards.
Even MY pitiful artistic efforts (I build models) are better than some dingaling who just stands there and says “I wouldn’t build THAT! It’s not glued together right, the paint is all smeary, and the decals are shiny underneath”, but never built a model in his/her life!
Because I TRIED; Roddenberry and Lucas TRIED; Faulkner, Collins, Lennon and Beethoven TRIED; Bush and Clinton TRIED. All of them (even I) put their efforts into doing something to express what they BELIEVE, what they FELT, what they LOVED.

You, AnnaD, if you’ll pardon my expression, GIve a Flying @#& about things and about PEOPLE.

The critics care about their OWN egos, and therefore must destroy everyone ELSE’S, in order to elevate their own.
Because they haven’t the courage of their own convictions to GET OUT THERE AND TRY, to take a small modicum of risk and reap the REWARDS of living, loving, and giving.

And THAT’S why Kim and TS get my vote for HEART.
And Big, BRASS ones - both of them.
Although I’ve never figured out what women get in big brass to go along with what guys get in big brass ones.
Ovaries?

Dunno, don’t really care; they get ‘em, and that’s what counts.

See ya!

Jim

Author ID: 8889 | 2/3/2007 11:36 AM CST | #80455


You guys will like this:

To Marry or Not

You also may like “The Sorrowful Rise of Neuter Man” but I was blocked from linking it.  You can find it here

http://tinyurl.com/35bk27

DD

Author ID: 8950 | 2/3/2007 07:50 PM CST | #80476


Coming Out Of The Closet

(I don’t remember where I found this, but given the ongoing pussification of species Maleus Americanium, I figured it needed posting...)

After searching for my sexual identity. I finally discovered it and I can no longer keep it in the closet. I am here to openly announce that I am a Retrosexual. My Retrosexuality is defined by the following Retrosexual code:

1: A Retrosexual, no matter what the women insists, pays for the date.

2: A Retrosexual opens doors for a lady. Even for the ones that fit that term only because they are female.

3: A Retrosexual DEALS WITH SHIT. Be it a flat tire, break-in into your home, or a natural disaster, you FUCKING DEAL WITH IT.

4: A Retrosexual not only eats red meat, he often kills it himself.

5: A Retrosexual doesn’t worry about living to be 90. It’s not how long you live, but how well. If you’re 90 years old and still smoking cigars and drinking, I salute you.

6: A Retrosexual does not use more hair or skin products than a woman. Women have several supermarket aisles of stuff. Retrosexuals need an endcap. (possibly 2 endcaps if you include shaving goods.)

7: A Retrosexual does not dress in clothes from Hot Topic when he’s 30 years old .

8: A Retrosexual should know how to properly kill stuff (or people) if need be. This falls under the “DEALING WITH SHIT” portion of The Code.

9: A Retrosexual watches no TV show with “Queer” in the title.

10: A Retrosexual does not let neighbors fuck up rooms in his house on national TV.

11: A Retrosexual should not give up excessive amounts of manliness for poontang. Some is inevitable, but major re-invention of yourself will only lead to you becoming a froo-froo little puss, and in the long run, she ain’t worth it.

12: A Retrosexual is allowed to seek professional help for major mental stress such as drug/alcohol addiction, death of your entire family in a freak treechipper accident, favorite sports team being moved to a different city etc. You are NOT allowed to see a shrink because Daddy didn’t pay you enough attention. Daddy was busy DEALING WITH SHIT. When you fucked up, he DEALT WITH YOU. Buck up pussy.

13: A Retrosexual will have at least one outfit in his wardrobe designed to conceal himself from prey.

14: A Retrosexual knows how to tie a fucking windsor knot when wearing a tie.

15: A Retrosexual does not strip naked, get into a sweat lodge, and bang on drums to bond with other guys. That shit is gay. However dressing in kilts, banging on drums around a campfire and drinking heavily is just fine.

16: A Retrosexual should have at least one good wound he can brag about getting.

17: A Retrosexual knows how to use a basic set of tools. If you can’t hammer a damn nail, or drill a straight hole, practice in secret until you can or be rightfully ridiculed for the wuss that you be.

18: A Retrosexual’s asshole is an exit ramp on the road of life. Ladies, contrary to what Cosmo says, spontaneously sticking a finger back there is a good way to be launched off the bed (or if Hooters hotwings have been recently consumed, lose a finger). Make you a deal, we won’t mess with your’s unless you want us to, and you won’t mess with our’s… period.

19: A Retrosexual will buy feminine hygine products if he has to, but only under protest.This falls under unpleasant things you have to fucking DEAL WITH. Get some Hagen-Daas while your at it.

20: A Retrosexual gives a lady his seat on the bus/subway/etc.

21: A Retrosexual does not order an apple martini at the bar. A Martini has fucking Vodka and vermouth in it dammit. And maybe an olive. In fact, why not just get a shot of Vodka??

Author ID: 8153 | 2/3/2007 08:34 PM CST | #80477


Norton: I think what is attractive about foreign women is this: they have not forgotten how to BE women. To BE feminine.  As you point out, these are not terms for “submissive”.  They are women who are not walking around with a chip on their shoulder.

I’m not much in a position to contribute to this discussion on marriage because I am, to use a term from more genteel times, one of nature’s bachelors.  But even I can tell the difference between a true, decent woman and the screeching harridans one so often encounters.

It has been my observation, as a disinterested party, that a hell of a lot of American women have a chip on their shoulder the size of a dinner plate, and imagine some of them (metaphorically) have razorblades implanted in their nether regions, waiting to chop things off at the least provocation.

I’ve seen too many of my contemporaries ruined by women who marry to get the kid or two they want, then throw the man away like so much used kleenex.  Many never see their kids again, thanks to our courts. I am glad this is not a fate that I was ever in a position to have befall me.

I was on an assignment recently that found me in a room with several office cubicles during a lunch hour.  Some woman was on the telephone, obviously with a friend. “Now, you remember, Sandra! What’s yours is YOURS, and what’s HIS is yours...”.

I’m not missing a thing.

Author ID: 7729 | 2/3/2007 09:20 PM CST | #80479


I’m new here.  Brief intro:  married 30+ yrs, don’t get to the range much but my husband does a lot, employed outside the home, he is too, offspring.

What I’m reading here confirms things I’ve worried about for a good while now.  But I think there’s an element that’s missing in the analysis and I hope you’ll stick with me as I try to put it into words because it links to guns, self-defense and some deep value issues.

Take a look at movies from the mid-40s.  A lot of them had independent (but vulnerable and good) women holding their own with independent (but vulnerable and good) men, and vice versa.  Yes, the social strictures on sex was an incentive to them both.  So was WWII and the reality of death.  It’s no accident there was a baby boom in the following decade.

But with the 50s we see a different tone.  There was an increasing tone of contemptuous putdown of women in films and especially on TV, along with an equally pernicious man in the grey flannel suit syndrome.  Increasingly both sexes were trivialized—but what was aimed at women was overt.  The undercutting of male roles was much more subtle.

At the same time, anyone paying attention knew that there were serious issues lurking out there.  Communism, the death camps in Nazi Germany and Stalin’s USSR.  Atomic weapons.

And we didn’t deal with that as a nation.  We didn’t come to grips with the good and bad from WWII and move on.  Too many tried to make an insulated life rather than a well-grounded one.  The result was a lot of cocktail parties, many housewives of a certain class taking barbituates or Valium and a screwed up Baby Boom generation.

Because we didn’t get moral clarity after WWII we got Vietnam.  We got the 60s and 70s.  And we got ideological feminism.  The “a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle” bilge.  And the Left ran with it, social engineering two generations since of embittered and brittle women (or empty girls in skinny grown bodies) and numb or embittered men.

But it has its roots in a lack of respect:  respect for self and for others.  There WAS a real disrespect towards women rampant as I was growing up.  I encountered it in school, when I went off to work.

What usually goes unsaid is that in a more quiet way there was an EQUAL disrespect towards MEN, and a lack of self respect on the part of many men.  And I do think that because we never dealt with Hiroshima and Nagaski well, as a nation we shied away from coming to grips with the important role that self-defense and physical strength play in a healthy society.

I’ve read the comments here with a heavy heart.  I know there are a lot of decent good men who’ve been pretty shittily treated by the feminazis, the shallow bitch types, the brittle girls in grownup bodies.

But I honestly think it’s tough out there for BOTH sexes now.  I know many men will find that hard to believe and I can’t blame you—I refuse to watch TV or most films because I can’t stand how men are portrayed.  And don’t get me started on the female studies crowd.  Still, I have to disagree a bit with this:

Meanwhile, the message women get is that they are just fine the way they are, and anybody who says any different is imposing some “male standards of beauty” or “patriarchal oppression” on them.

While we are drugging energetic boys in school, we’re also teaching our girls to hate their bodies and vomit up their meals.  Some of them are starting the pattern in late elementary school, just as the effects of puberty set in.

Men have always had a certain willingness to put their bodies through hell, if need be.  It took that to hunt, to work until muscles couldn’t do much more, to go to war if necessary.

But women NEED to be intimately comfortable with their bodies, as the source and nurturing of new life.  And we have two generations of women who are dead to their basic physical selves, empty. 

Yes, they are newly ‘empowered’ to be openly manipulative, materialistic, contemptuous.  But in most cases they are mimicking what they have been shown and taught.  The reality is that inside they are empty and confused.  In some that manifests as desperate.  In some that manifests as bitterly angry.  In some that manifests as totally unpredictable.

After 30+ years of a marriage we both grew in (a lot), and not without some struggles and dry periods, I am deeply grateful to share my life with a man I respect, rely on and LIKE.  And—and here’s the thing—I know he respects, relies on and likes me too.  It wasn’t always easy but we have grown into a deep partnership even as we have matured into greater strength in our own rights. 

Respect.  It’s so key and so lacking in our culture now.  If we don’t fundamentally respect ourselves and offer respect to others, none of the rest of it ever really falls in place. 

And here’s the thing:  Respect for self and others is at the heart of self-defense, both figurative (emotionally in relationships) and literal (with private arms and our military).  Neither my husband nor I swagger around armed - but each of us would shoot to save our own lives and those of innocent people around us.  Neither of us is interested in conquering and subugating other people - but we each believe strongly in defending our country and our freedoms.

I suspect that’s true of most of the people here at Kim’s site too.  Gentlemen, I hope that each of you who has not yet found a partner comes to do so over time.  There is a deep companionship and value in a good marriage that lasts through the hard times.  My soldier friends say the only thing that comes close is their experiences with comrades in combat.  And come to think of it, given the state of the world and our society at the moment, ‘combat’ isn’t a bad metaphor for the obstacles to finding that partner and making a good marriage.

I hope you all consider taking the risk, when the time is right.

Thanks for letting a newcomer share some (perhaps too many!) thoughts.  They are, if not particularly wise, at least the product of years of reflection.

Author ID: 9506 | 2/3/2007 09:41 PM CST | #80482


Wow, can I identify with this problem!

I was raised to be polite and proper with ladies, and it has only caused me grief.  I also recall being admonished by our SCHOOL as a youngster about “harassing” girls, etc, and the consequences we’d face, and so I became totally terrified about consorting with girls.  I got over that a few years later, but needless to say, it made things more awkward than necessary.

I recall in particular several incidents, one amusing where a girl actually tried to use me for sex and got annoyed when I tried to talk to her(I found out a few weeks later, and this really shocked me!), and another where a debutante overtly admitted to trying to exercise her power on me to get her to do her bidding:  she thought that by helping her with her luggage, I was acting as her sycophant, when in fact I was just being polite!  I just turned around and walked away after she made her obnoxious remark.

Living in NYC, land of social arbitrage, I’ve more or less given up on romantic pursuits and focus on my meaningless career and stupid hobbies:  I am not a man here, but a career, a checking account, a node in a dense herd, a distraction, and maybe a means-to-an-end.

Unforuntately, even though I don’t like religion, the best women to me have always been pious… I guess you need to believe in something other than material advantage and survival to have the capacity to love and be loved.  I just don’t want to have to convert to win her favor, but maybe Paris is worth the Mass after all…

Author ID: 9507 | 2/4/2007 12:22 AM CST | #80485


Y’know, it wasn’t but 15 or 20 years ago when I was at University, when I was having a “discussion” with a female student about respect, objectification, and relations between the sexes. I knew there would be trouble when there was professed disparagement of the word “lady.” I explained that while the outward actions that may have described polite behavior may have changed, the inner attitudes that defined them had not. “For instance, a gentleman-of-today may need to show it in different ways, but the underlying respect must be there.” Said she: “All a guy has to do to be a “gentleman” is hold a damned door.”

It made me really happy that I had already met my wife.

Author ID: 9505 | 2/4/2007 03:53 AM CST | #80488


MoMinuteMan;

Well, except in one or two areas, I’m proud to claim the classification of Retrosexual. Having hunted that particular species that often shoots back, I gave up hunting after one Goose-gunning experience back in ‘80 or ‘81. My camo gear is gone (who the HELL fits that stuff 35 years later?), and in 8 months of combat, I managed to not get hit even once (although there WERE a couple of, interesting, close ones!). But otherwise, I think I qualify.

Everwyck,

In dealing with the feminazi at school, I trust you told her that any TRUE WOMAN would realize and recognize that a TRUE Gentleman has many more qualities than socially-acceptable manners, but as long as she held that attitude, she would never even see the manners?
@$$holes aren’t always male, regardless of what society and the ‘nazis would have us think. But the output is ALWAYS fecal in nature, be it verbal or otherwise.

See ya!

Jim

Author ID: 8889 | 2/4/2007 09:04 AM CST | #80501


I have been very fortunate in my married life, not that we haven’t had some problems.  Many friends and acquaintances frequently complain about their significant other.  They always seem to be fighting and worrying about who is in charge.  My wife is an angel.  She puts up with me.  I would not complain her in public under torture.  To her maybe, but not about her.  Its about RESPECT.  Married since 1993, my wife and I have not yet had a fight.  Disagreements, yes, but not a fight.  We can’t figure out what there is to fight about.  If you don’t respect and love one another, why on Earth are you getting married?  That said, after seeing some of the crap that buddies of mine have gone through, in divorces, I am really glad that my wife and I have a happy marriage.  Same with seeing the crap my single friends have to go through.  Thank G-d I’m married.  Once you realize, in your gut, that marriage is for life, sweating the small stuff is easier.  And 99% of the problems are small stuff. 

That said, my wife and I met at a medieval reenactment event.  With both of us in our 30’s, and already liking that old fashioned Chivalry stuff, I think we started out on a sounder footing.  Some of those medieval values like Honor, Love, Cherish really do apply to a good marriage if BOTH parties apply them. 

That said,

A man picks up a bottle and a genie appears..... “I’ll grant you a wish for freeing me.” The man thinks and asks for a good woman to marry.  The genie states that the woman in question will be either the world’s best cook, the world’s best house keeper, or a total wanton in bed and the man could pick one.  The man immediately states, “ I can alway hire a chef or maid.....”

Now, that in a nutshell, is why a close relationship is secondary to nothing in a marriage (or relationship of your choice...).  Unless both are committed to that, the home will be unhappy, no matter how well the house is run, the kids are raised, etc.

Just my 2 cents worth.

Author ID: 6357 | 2/4/2007 10:36 AM CST | #80504


“...I remember a woman screaming at me, “Women don’t want to be objects!”

Trying to be conciliatory, I said, “OK, you can be subjects.”

That didn’t suit her either. ...”

ROFL!

DD

Author ID: 8950 | 2/4/2007 11:33 AM CST | #80506