Men Behaving Badly - Why?

MND ^ | July 15, 2003 | Karl Glasson, Ph.D.

[SauronOfMordor]

I've heard from various Biblical scholars that Joseph was around 30 or so and Mary was 15 to about 18 when she married Joseph and had Jesus so there is precident where the man concentrated on his career and taking care of many issues before taking a wife.

Looking at it from a practical standpoint, historically the man was not a viable husband until he had enough income and assets to support a wife, which generally happened after age 25. Conversely, families had an incentive to get the girls married off early after puberty, so as to not have to worry about teen pregnancy (or to deal with teen pregnancy after the fact!)

[SauronOfMordor]

I also wonder how they determined that somebody was "addicted" to porn. Does a subscription to Playboy qualify? Most guys enjoy looking at (healthy, cute) naked women. It's how we're wired. I don't have one male friend that does not enjoy pics of naked women. Of course, we also make time to earn a living, and freep, and have real-live sex whenever possible. I guess my definition of "addiction" would involve the guy being sufficiently obsessed with it that he doesn't have time for anything else

[Ta Wee]

=>And to you this sounds like I hate women. Instead of futzing up this thread with your personal injuries, and individual examples of 'he done her wrong,' how about lifting your sights a bit... above youself, above what happened to your friend Suzie, and look at the big picture for a change. Your culture is going out of business. Do you care?

Your verbose, wandering, rude, and patronizing reply gives you away.

Where did I advocate a matriarchy?
Where did I say I thought society was in good shape?
Where did I whine about what has happened to me or any friends?

I didn't, but since you hate women, you didn't even notice. All women are the same, of course.

Society is going to hell fast, for a lot of reasons. Blaming it all on the nutty women who want to pretend a 119 lb woman can make a living as a firefighter, or other nonsense is simplistic. I read a lot of history, don't watch Lifetime or Oprah, and the signs of decay are everywhere.

Find yourself a perfect partner: another man.

[SauronOfMordor]

Your responses are fascinating. I could sit here and try to figure you out all day.

I've read Nick's postings on this thread, and he's never accused you of advocating matriarchy, saying society is in good shape, or whining about what happened to yourself or friends, as far as I could notice. I, on the other hand, have noted (see post 109, this thread) where on other threads you've gone on about things that have happened to you.

All Nick is going on about is that this current society's tendency for marriages not lasting, kids growing up without day to day contact with their fathers, and lots of men seeing their stuff go away in the aftermath of divorce, does not make for a healthy society.

Just because people disagree with you, does not automaticly mean they "hate women". This dialogue is like dialogues with some African-Americans, where the cry of "You're a RACIST" is the standard line when the other party doesn't have a reasoned response to an argument undercutting his ideological position. It is an attempt to shut down discussion and divert it into name calling.

[Ta Wee]

Perhaps you cannot read well. How would you interpret ND's post as follows, addressed to me:

And to you this sounds like I hate women. Instead of futzing up this thread with your personal injuries, and individual examples of 'he done her wrong,' how about lifting your sights a bit... above youself, above what happened to your friend Suzie, and look at the big picture for a change. Your culture is going out of business. Do you care?

=>I've read Nick's postings on this thread, and he's never accused you of advocating matriarchy, saying society is in good shape, or whining about what happened to yourself or friends, as far as I could notice.

You did read his above passage, didn't you?

=>Your responses are fascinating. I could sit here and try to figure you out all day.

It must be difficult for you to accept that there are women who are linear, rational thinkers, believe in personal responsibility, and actually believe they are human.

[Oberon]

What woman wants a man who tells her, you go be ignorant, let me do all the thinking, and I'll be happy, because unless I get MY way, I'm going to sit in the corner and pout? And maybe stamp my feet, too!

No... In that case, the woman finds herself talking to the spot in the room where the man used to be... and won't ever be again.

It's a curious fact of life: a man can almost always find a woman willing to put up with him. And if he can find one, he can find another.

I don't mean to say that's a good thing; it's just an observation.

[Ta Wee]

=>What woman wants a man who tells her, you go be ignorant, let me do all the thinking, and I'll be happy, because unless I get MY way, I'm going to sit in the corner and pout? And maybe stamp my feet, too!
No... In that case, the woman finds herself talking to the spot in the room where the man used to be... and won't ever be again.

Thanks for confirming my observations. There are a lot of spoilt little boys out there dwelling in the bodies of mature males.

=>It's a curious fact of life: a man can almost always find a woman willing to put up with him. And if he can find one, he can find another.

That's because a lot of women will settle for garbage. Not ALL women,however, and not those with any pride or self-respect.

[SauronOfMordor]

That's because a lot of women will settle for garbage. Not ALL women,however, and not those with any pride or self-respect.

Relationships involve a lot of give and take. Ideally, each partner should put up with some amount of annoying behavior (as long as it's compensated by a greater amount of pleasing behavior), and strive to minimize their own annoying behavior. Where such can be achieved, you have a working relationship

Nobody can be perfect at all times, and someone who demands perfection at all times will be alone most of the time

The facts of life are that almost-perfect people are in high demand, and will be able to select an almost-perfect mate from a wide pool, while very-imperfect people have a tiny pool of people willing to put up with them, and have their choices limited to settling for whoever will put up with them, or being content with solitude

[Oberon]

There are a lot of spoilt little boys out there dwelling in the bodies of mature males.

Well, that's one perspective on it... and the ruling elites prefer their subjects to have immature traits. It's one of the hallmarks of domestication.

On the other hand, a man should not expect to be taken for granted, and many simply will not.

[GrandMoM]

Relationships involve a lot of give and take. Ideally, each partner should put up with some amount of annoying behavior (as long as it's compensated by a greater amount of pleasing behavior), and strive to minimize their own annoying behavior. Where such can be achieved, you have a working relationship....you are so right!

[asformeandformyhouse]

I recall a time in college when I made the effort to hold the door for a young lady...out of politeness and she gave me the "I don't need a man to hold the door for me" routine

When a similar thing happened to me, I stated "But as a man, I feel the need to hold the door for lady. Obviously, I mistakenly confused you for being one."

[Joe Brower]

"I suggest learning to better hide your poisonous hostility towards women."

With all due respect, you seem to have your own issues going in the other direction. Your posts make it quite apparent that you are projecting your own bias.

[SauronOfMordor]

Great comeback! I should remember it.

[BudgieRamone]

You know what really thows the "bad boy" searchers for a loop? looking like one (bad boy) and then letting them find out you are a staunch Christian conservative who refuses to use them (yes, I mean use). Let them have even a whiff of the fact you are actually responsible, upstanding guy or that you take your faith seriously and they run like scared mice.

[Nick Danger]

Find yourself a perfect partner: another man.

Which brings us to another major theme in the article, the demonization of men. If it was just you doing this stuff I suppose we could write it off to some percentage of individual women having "issues," but alas, it isn't just you.

Christina Hoff Sommers tells the story of how the "Superbowl Sunday" myth got started. A bunch of self-appointed Professional Feminists staged a press conference where they totally misrepresented a paper written by some professor, and sold the media a bill of goods about how millions of women would be beaten up during or after the upcoming Superbowl game. Only one reporter bothered to chase down the original research paper and noticed that it said no such thing. All the rest of them bought it hook, line, and sinker. So here are millions of men watching a football game, and on comes a public service advertisement warning them not to get violent with the womenfolk. If the urge to punch or kick the wife became too great, they should turn off the game. What the Hell was that about?

Football... men... violence. Get it? The poor creatures are simply poisoned by their own testosterone. Brutes, every one. Women's magazines implored their readers to understand that yes, you've known him for twenty years and he seems totally harmless, but he's a man. It's only a matter of time before he goes off and stabs you a hundred times, and the children too. Get out of the house while you still can. See that? There's OJ. Stabbed her, didn't he. They're all like that. Even let them in your house and and sooner or later they will kill you or maim you.

We've all seen these articles; the media is full of them. Men are brutes... genetic defectives. Keep them away from the children.

Well, that crusade is pretty much over. The legal environment is now set up to deal with these horrible creatures. All a woman has to do now to get one of these awful things out of her house is go downtown and sign a paper that she's scared that he might hit her. Has he ever even come close to such a thing? Well, no, but that doesn't matter. He's a man. Out of the house he goes, and if he comes back the police will arrest him. Due process? What's that? We don't need no stinking due process. You're a man; put on the cuffs.

Still a problem, though. There are these men who refuse to get out of the way of women who are trying to get promoted. They're really aggressive about getting ahead themselves, and some of them are damned good at their jobs. There needs to be a way for a woman to point her finger at one of these guys and make him go away. "Get him out of here," she'll say, and away he'll go. So now we have an epidemic of sexual harrassment. It's all over the media. These poor White House interns forced to perform unnatural acts just to out-do their mothers, who screwed Pavarotti. And once again, by the time we're done, the legal system has been changed. And company policies, too. Men are foced to sit in classrooms and listen to some smarmy bitch tell them that their days of forcing their secretaries to climb up on the desk are over. And sure enough, with a flick of the finger, women make troublesome men disappear. She felt harrassed. That really is the standard in law. You could look it up. Theree doesn't have to be any actual behavior; she just has to feel harrassed. Just like the wife only has to feel scared.

So how we have a legal system with a whole new twist to it. Force of law will now be applied to deprive men of liberty and property depending on how individual women feel. It's not about anything the men did. They don't have to do anything. Some woman just has to say she feels a certain way, and a man loses his job, or his house, or goes to jail, often without even a hearing or a chance to know why this is happening to him. Isn't this great?

And now this gayness thing. This is really weird. Mark Steyn has a good article this week concerning the remarkable progress our light-loafered friends have made at getting their, er, lifestyle not only accepted, but positively glorified. Gay people are just so cool now. Why, everyone should aspire to gayness, it's the coming thing. And if you can't be gay, at least be Metrosexual: go get a facial, and a pedicure. And some pretty shoes. And once again it's the same media game. We've gone from men are guilty (proving innocence isn't even enough anymore, see the DNA paternity cases) to men are genetic defectives who aren't safe to have around women or children, to the glorification of homosexuals and effeminacy, fer crissakes.

Your admonishment above is just another drop in the bucket. I don't really care where it's coming from in your case; you just spewed the thing in a moment of pique. It's in the zeitgeist and you latched onto it. I'm more interested in why this is a huge cultural force right now. On the face of it, the notion that we should encourage an organization like the Boy Scouts to allow openly homosexual men to serve as role models for pre-teen boys is, well, weird. But we have all these people advocating this, and a supposedly responsible outfit like the United Way withholding funds from Boy Scout troops unless they go along with it. And instead of people rising up with torches and pitchforks to march on the United Way offices, we have newspaper editorialists lauding the United Way for its "courage," while lambasting the Boy Scouts for being a bunch of old fuddy-duddies who don't understand that exposing boys to homosexual role models is just the height of modern cultural chic. And if you don't want your own son going off on camping trips with Lance and his friends, then you're a homophobe and an all-around neanderthal and you probably beat women, too.

I suppose that your remark above was meant to be cutting. Well, I'm 55 years old and it's a little late to be sowing doubts about my sexuality. I'm not in those "formative years" anymore. And similarly, when I heard all the crap about being a violent brute and a wolf in the office, I figured it was just a bunch of screaming women. Like all men, I have a notch filter for screaming women, so I just tuned them out. It wasn't until almost a decade into the "men are scum" media hurricane that I realized what this might be doing to boys. Here are authoritiy figures on television, and in the newspapers, explaining to little Johnny that men are genetic defectives, and that his ineluctable fate is to mature into a wife-beating, daughter-raping deadbeat dad. He can't help it. It's what he is. He is by nature bad.

Hmm. Is that a smart thing to be telling little kids? Why would a culture instruct its young men to believe that they are doomed to lives of depravity and waste, to causing harm, to being violent and predatory nuisances? Does anyone actually want that to happen? Why are we are doing it?

And now this. Fisting classes in high school... homosexual scoutmasters... the most flitty, prancing queens glorified on television as cultural icons... even women on Internet forums telling men they should go find a man. What is this about? The other nonsense was at least understandable as a grab for money and power. But what the Hell purpose is served by blasting confusing messages about human sexuality through the schools, the media, and academia? "Leftism" doesn't explain this. Homosexuality has never been an artifact of Marxism. This is something else entirely. Is it part of the cultural death wish, another aspect of failing to reproduce at replacement rate? Or is it, as 'longtermmemmory' suggests in #67, something more sinister... a truly outrageous and sick scheme by seriously disturbed lesbian wackos to rid the Earth of male humans, presumably so they can have all the girls to themselves? That would sound nuts if they weren't actually working diligently to make it happen.

Yes, another long, verbose post. That's because I refuse to have you set the agenda. Earlier I suggested that what you really wanted was to have us shut up and talk about what you wanted, which is of course you, and you have had some luck with that. But I want to talk about something else, and so I'm going to.

[SauronOfMordor]

Or is it, as 'longtermmemmory' suggests in #67, something more sinister... a truly outrageous and sick scheme by seriously disturbed lesbian wackos to rid the Earth of male humans, presumably so they can have all the girls to themselves? That would sound nuts if they weren't actually working diligently to make it happen.

Not all that far-fetched. I know a number of women who are "AC/DC", some preferring women but occasionally going with guys, others primarily hetero but occasionally going the other way. From my experiences, I think there are more AC/DC girls than pure lesbians. In such a case, if the pure lesbians can poison the environment between men and women, they're more likely to have the AC/DC's to themselves. It's also an incentive for gay men going after AC/DC guys

[Feldkurat_Katz]

Homosexuality has never been an artifact of Marxism. This is something else entirely. Is it part of the cultural death wish, another aspect of failing to reproduce at replacement rate?

It has to do with a branch of Marxism - the work of Gramsci (who influenced the generation of 1968.) Basically, Gramsci advocated attacking the traditional culture instead of Lenin-style armed takeover. Gramsci's goal was the same as Lenin's - a Communist state. Today's radical liberals continue the work of Gramsci except that destroying traditional culture, which used to be means, became goal.

Or is it, as 'longtermmemmory' suggests in #67, something more sinister... a truly outrageous and sick scheme by seriously disturbed lesbian wackos to rid the Earth of male humans, presumably so they can have all the girls to themselves? That would sound nuts if they weren't actually working diligently to make it happen.

I would like to offer some hope. Despite all the feminist howling, women need men more than men need women. Why? Because for men physical needs (the sexual drive) are more important than emotional needs. For women, emotional needs are more important than the physical ones. Thus, mens' needs can be satisfied in many ways (e.g through one night stands, prostitution etc.) whereas women's panic about men being "unwilling to commit" is very real.

[Nonstatist]

You're The Man, Nick

So how would you predict the next 50 years.? Europe is probably about 10 years more decayed than us, dont you think? Sweden has pretty much de-institutionalized marriage,with others close behind, and the welfare state's imminent rocking point has garnered the full attention of the elites in Europe; that is, the crisis in pensions and demographic imbalance. They (the elites) have decided to import their future generations, but unfortunately they picked Muslim Countries to import from, so now theyre screwed on two fronts. A nasty metamorphisis is forthcoming coming, soon enough, isnt it?.

And what about us? Immigrants are fueling whatever pop. growth we have, and the demographics are somewhat different here. But IMO theres no stopping the coming debacle; a Republican govt ( all 3 branches) certainly seems impotent, and there no stopping the media's onslaught of PC propaganda.

So it will be interesting, if you look at it from a distance. But whats the end game?

[Nonstatist]

whereas women's panic about men being "unwilling to commit" is very real.

But no solution consisting of turning back the "clock" (i.e getting rid of no fault divorce, dismantling the "social security" net of direct wealth transfer from young to old and men to women, etc) is on the horizon, given the opposing distribution of power amongst academia, media, govt beauracracy, etc. IMO they will tinker around the edges and never get to the root of the problem. And then things will get really, really bad . IMO.

[SauronOfMordor]

I would like to offer some hope. Despite all the feminist howling, women need men more than men need women. Why? Because for men physical needs (the sexual drive) are more important than emotional needs. For women, emotional needs are more important than the physical ones. Thus, mens' needs can be satisfied in many ways (e.g through one night stands, prostitution etc.) whereas women's panic about men being "unwilling to commit" is very real.

Men have emotional needs too. We need friendship and intellectual companionship, besides sex. But guys can satisfy their companionship needs with their male buddies

You are correct that a guy can have enjoyable sex with a woman that he is not emotionally connected to (else prostitution would not be the worlds oldest profession), so one option available to high-status men who have had all the kids they're interested in having, is to get a vasectomy and then have a succession of girlfriends (keeping no individual one around long enough to qualify for "palimony")