sally4sara Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 You forgot this: If men and women were able the fertilize themselves - starvation and eventual extinction. So it wouldn't matter (with asexuality anyway) which gender was left, all paths lead to over population.
zhsoj Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 If men and women were able the fertilize themselves - starvation and eventual extinction. So it wouldn't matter (with asexuality anyway) which gender was left, all paths lead to over population. This is of course ignoring the fact that we have yet to hit overpopulation as a species due to increasing lifespans and more efficient food production. So we really have no idea where overpopulation lies and if we can actually avoid it without reducing our growth. I'd say this is apparently true on the engineering front where the ratio in the US I believe is about 1 woman to 20 men... But then that is for certain a cultural thing... BTW had I been wiser way back when I would have gone for biology. Lots more women in biology. Oh oh... and not because I need them. Obviously I don't as I'm still a breathing engineer.
Trialbyfire Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 The odd thing? Canadian women still reported higher happiness levels.This has me curious. I wonder why there's a difference? Any insight into it? It's not as if Canadian and American cultures are light years apart, especially with dating and relationships.
donnamaybe Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 This has me curious. I wonder why there's a difference? Any insight into it? It's not as if Canadian and American cultures are light years apart, especially with dating and relationships. Different governments, perhaps? After all, ours has monumentally SUCKED for eight years, although I do see a light at the end of the proverbial tunnel. The health of a nation could have a major impact on the happiness of its inhabitants.
clv0116 Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 The odd thing? Canadian women still reported higher happiness levels. Probably more Canadian women are non-natives on a percentage basis.
Kamille Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 The journalist hints at better social security in Canada, but nowhere do they analyze why. A poll of 12 European countries also reports that women say they are happier now then in the past.
Woggle Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 What is this nonsense about men needing a mommy to take care of them. I know when I was single my place was always spotless and I am perfectly capable of cooking for myself. As for emotional support it has been my male friends who have always been there for me when times were tough. They were the ones who gave me a place to stay and food when I was on the verge of being homeless and they were the ones who showed me the time of my life after my divorce. With the exception of my current wife all I have gotten from women is grief, grief and more grief so I don't get this idea of men being lost without women. Also women have jack to do with civilizing us. You don't know how many fights I have seen over females.
clv0116 Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 Hmmm... Funny that my BF fought for and won custody of his and his ex's son and raised him to be a fine young man. Kinda blows your theory. It's not even germane unless your BF also got child support and alimony from his ex. Just thought I'd point that part you 'missed' out.
EddieN Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 Different governments, perhaps? After all, ours has monumentally SUCKED for eight years, although I do see a light at the end of the proverbial tunnel. The health of a nation could have a major impact on the happiness of its inhabitants. Uh, what does that have to do with ANYTHING in this thread? I'm surprised by a lot of people's opinions in this thread. They're making the majority of men seem like insecure and miserable babies. What the hell? I've never had a girlfriend, and I'm perfectly happy. I might have a girl I see some day, but I doubt I'll go so far to actually love her, enough that it would compromise ANY of my personal goals. Yeah, I haven't been laid in a long time or felt any kind of feeling for a girl, and I'd like to experience those things, but I certainly don't NEED them to be healthier. I can have sex with the most beautiful woman I've ever seen tonight and it's not going to positively or negatively affect me and the current goals I'm pursuing. There are many chumps out there - no matter what they do, their ultimate intention is to get women. Their entire lifelong careers could just be fronts to attract the right woman. They do it all for the nookie. This is what makes sense from an evolutionary viewpoint - every living thing on this planet has the ultimate goal to reproduce, and many organisms require a mate to do so. Then there are guys who don't give a crap whether they get laid or not. If it comes to them, they'll take it and enjoy it. If it doesn't, then it doesn't affect them. These guys have separated themselves from the ultimate life goal to get mates and eventually reproduce. They make their own goals and create their own drive. They don't worry about women.
Woggle Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 Also his ex must have been horrible. Men don't win custody and barely have a right to be in their children's lives unless the mother is truly horrible. If I had a kid with my ex I would probably have full custody right now but it shouldn't take the mother being that bad for a man to have the right to be a father.
clv0116 Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 Also his ex must have been horrible. Men don't win custody and barely have a right to be in their children's lives unless the mother is truly horrible. Some guys have trouble pulling good quality women. It's just the way life goes. I guess you finally got a good one though.
Woggle Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 Some guys have trouble pulling good quality women. It's just the way life goes. I guess you finally got a good one though. It sure seems like it.
shadowplay Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 What is this nonsense about men needing a mommy to take care of them. I know when I was single my place was always spotless and I am perfectly capable of cooking for myself. As for emotional support it has been my male friends who have always been there for me when times were tough. They were the ones who gave me a place to stay and food when I was on the verge of being homeless and they were the ones who showed me the time of my life after my divorce. With the exception of my current wife all I have gotten from women is grief, grief and more grief so I don't get this idea of men being lost without women. Also women have jack to do with civilizing us. You don't know how many fights I have seen over females. Typical response from you. I hope you realize that there are as many crap men out there as crap women.
Trialbyfire Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 How about less crap, more love between genders?
Sam Spade Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 Sam Spade, while I won't deny you're a bit of a cynic, I think you make a really, really important point. Relationships don't change who you are, your strengths or your flaws. I wouldn't compare it to the naive passage of time in childhood, though. As an adult one has way more self knowledge and a certain amount of power over outcomes. I'd argue that's what makes people capable of loving romantically--the volition, the choice. Wiseguy Sam tells it like it is. Cynicism is my middle name, but it's usually well-intentioned. Anyway, the reason I'm bringin up childhood is that it strongly influences the choices of how you aproach relationships, as a byproduct of coping mechanisms with life in general learned in childhood, and some are better than others. My utilitarian approach to relationships is direct consequence of having a relatively rough childhood, and is basically "don't whine about it, get it done" or "what? u expect a medal for doing your job?" sort of deal. While obviously pathological in its own right, I bet as an approach it's a little better than expecting a world of relationship bliss to descend upon me - I consider that to be a somewhat dangerous and irresponsible idea (because subscribing to it would make it too easy to forget that my **** stinks too). In summary - find a girl, examine character, values, goals, if for the most part (and that's flexible) there is compatibility, don't waste energy pursuing other options. Have career, have kids, have prostate cancer, and die . I'm halfway through - almost done! .
EddieN Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 How about less crap, more love between genders? Some might argue that more crap between, or rather ON the genders is a HUGE form of love.
Woggle Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 Typical response from you. I hope you realize that there are as many crap men out there as crap women. Maybe true but in my life women have hands down turned on me more than men. Men to me are just more trustworthy and reliable especially if you are a man yourself.
Woggle Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 How about less crap, more love between genders? That would be great but we are far from that right now.
Ruby Slippers Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 What it comes down to for me is that I don't need a man, but I want one. And I would only consider a relationship with someone like-minded, someone who does not need a woman to function and take care of himself, but who wants one to complement his life. That said, it is natural to me that when you meet someone you are compatible with and grow to love him/her, you feel that certain needs are met that were not when you were single. Some degree of needing and feeling needed is healthy. In relationships, I have been on both sides -- where I felt I needed him more, and it seemed he needed me more. I think it works better when the man seems to need the woman a little more. If anyone's going to be concerned about anyone being clingy or needy, it's usually the man, so it's probably best if he needs her a little more than she needs him. That seems to make her feel sufficiently appreciated and him feel sufficiently fortunate to maintain that delicate balance of relationship health that can be so wobbly when the dynamics are not right.
Woggle Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 When a man needs a woman more she loses respect for him and when the respect goes the attraction and love goes with it. The only kind of relationships that are truly successful are ones where both complement each other and enhance each other's lives. It's not based on games like who needs who more but good luck finding a relationship like that.
GorillaTheater Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 I'd like to say that I don't need a woman, but I can't really remember what it was like not having one.
clv0116 Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 The journalist hints at better social security in Canada, but nowhere do they analyze why. Because they want it to be true.
sally4sara Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 What is this nonsense about men needing a mommy to take care of them. I know when I was single my place was always spotless and I am perfectly capable of cooking for myself. As for emotional support it has been my male friends who have always been there for me when times were tough. They were the ones who gave me a place to stay and food when I was on the verge of being homeless and they were the ones who showed me the time of my life after my divorce. With the exception of my current wife all I have gotten from women is grief, grief and more grief so I don't get this idea of men being lost without women. Also women have jack to do with civilizing us. You don't know how many fights I have seen over females. Heads up! Woggle is everyone now. So nothing he didn't experience is applicable to anyone else. If he didn't do something a certain way, no one else did it either. And mommies taking care of their kids? Pffftt, THAT doesn't happen. Why? Cause woggle's mom didn't do it for him.
anne1707 Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 When a man needs a woman more she loses respect for him and when the respect goes the attraction and love goes with it. The only kind of relationships that are truly successful are ones where both complement each other and enhance each other's lives. It's not based on games like who needs who more but good luck finding a relationship like that. It does not happen often but on this I have to agree with Woggle. A successful relationship is an equal partnership with both bringing their various strengths, qualities & flaws into that. Forget all those powergames like the woman does not call first. Forget all the nonsense about "Don't do **** until the *th date". Just treat each other with respect and play fair.
Ruby Slippers Posted June 17, 2009 Posted June 17, 2009 It does not happen often but on this I have to agree with Woggle. A successful relationship is an equal partnership with both bringing their various strengths, qualities & flaws into that. I agree. But it seems to me that it is really rare that you have a truly equal balance like that. I have never achieved that, even though I always aspire to it.
Recommended Posts