The Not-so-secret

January 9, 2010

Meerkat's last post, as most of his posts, was brilliant.

If it's all in our heads, if it's only our attitudes, if it's just one big cosmic coincidence, how is it so many of the so-called "Woman haters" on this board, despite coming from diverse social, economic, age, racial, religious, and geographical (within the USA) backgrounds, have come to almost identical conclusions ? The guys 5'7 and down here almost all with few exceptions report huge obstacles that make it borderline impossible to connect romantically with women. Some other guys who get past stage one, report abuse and manipulation from women when they refuse to play games or treat women brutally. The men from Europe on this board living in America, almost all report how difficult it is to deal with females in this country.

Got to agree with the word "hate". Men don't "hate women". I doubt any of the guys who posts here hates their mother, or their grandmother.

I've got to agree that this is a place to vent out my frustrations and see if I'm the only one noticing it. This is actually how I see if it's me who is the problem, or if it's something more, something I alone cannot fix. I seldom wrong women in real life (I deal with a good portion of women at my job every day, although not really that many young women) nor do I treat them wrong or have any kind of attitude outside of either neutral/indifferent/making light/laughter of them (to the cunts and princesses) or if it's a nice/sweet lady, pleasent and extremely kind towards them. I think it's laughable how some of the women think that somehow women can use their psychic powers to see what I post on loveshack.org or talk about with my male friends

The reason we don't listen to SOME (meerkat, who gives rational and realistic advice, I find myself listening to him quite alot and it's actually helping me to some degree) advice is because it consists of disproven cliches and lies. Women on this board will actually expect me to believe that women are clairvoyant before ever admitting that the reason most women my age are not sexually attracted to me or interested in me is simply because I'm 5'7, of a rather slim build, am lower middle class, and don't have a car. I don't carry a chip on my shoulder and am actually quite friendly, confident, life of the party, making people laugh kind of guy in real life, maybe a LITTLE bit shy at first but most who get to know me think I'm awesome yet women here expect me to believe some chicks who can't find Canada on the map can somehow SEE THROUGH my exterior like some kind of marvel comic superhero

Funny, I know MANY guys who are actually openly and gaping *******s (no this is not another Ahole VS nice guy comment BTW), guys who abuse the kindness of their girlfriends (and male friends too), cheat on them, ignore them, treat them like a piece of meat, but they are tall, "Hot", play football, listen to rap, work out 2 hours a day, fratboys with goatees, and you know what?

Not only do women not seem to notice their "bad attitudes", but everywhere I see them it's almost as if women of all kinds (whether they're the trailer park chick, the smart girl, the dumb girl, the overachiever girl, or even the religious ones!) some who I want (they have good personalities) and some who I don't want, are all lining up to get their boxes beaten by these scumbags. They'd rather chase the illusion of turning one of these tall "HOT" fratboy fags into a gentleman that will marry them over just accepting someone who is perfectly alright and has a lot more to offer outside of the most superficial of traits that one could easily live without (they don't have to go out with an ugly, boring, or out of shape guy, but come on, an average looking 5'2 girl saying a handsome 5'7 guy is too short and not dateable?) .

Real life experience is why I, and I expect my fellow males who are suffering through the same issues, wipe our collective asses with the cued chorus of "ITS UR ATTITUDE".

January 9, 2010

What an odd coincidence that all of the people on here who talk about the significance of attitude are pretty satisfied with their lives, and those who most vehemently reject that concept are pretty pissed off. If I didn't know better, I'd think there was a connection.

January 9, 2010

What an odd coincidence that all of the people on here who talk about the significance of attitude are pretty satisfied with their lives, and those who most vehemently reject that concept are pretty pissed off. If I didn't know better, I'd think there was a connection.

I find this interesting as well.

I think, a lot of times, we feel justified in so many things, just as we feel entitled to so many things.

It reminds me of the person hellbent on seeking revenge. You can reason with that person, explaining how revenge won't make anything better, and has the potential to make him/her look foolish (if not totally nuts) in the end... but they're so deeply hurt and afraid that they don't want to look at things in a different manner.

Something has been taken from them, in a manner of speaking, and they seek to regain whatever illusion of that they can manage.

January 9, 2010

The reason not as many women hate men is because men are generally easier to get along with and less judgemental . Plenty of women I know who are a little different in way of thinking of dressing from the rest of women, not only like men, but have only male friends because they can't stand being around most women.

*raises hand* I know over a dozen men and consider almost all of them my friends. My BFF is a guy. He is awesome. My female friends tend to be selfish and talk to me only when they need advice. They don't come to me for reassurance because I am a deathly honest person. I value honesty and people that value me for more than me telling them whether or not sleeping with a married man is morally wrong/right. How can I even answer such a question for them?! At least my guy friends understand not to ask me such BS. They know how to make decisions for themselves. The only things they ask me about are technology, books, God, and whether or not they should give a woman a shot based upon signals she's sending out. Even then, I cannot be sure. I always tell them "nothing ventured, nothing gained." Being around guys allows for me to be my loud, goofy, and colorful self.

January 9, 2010

SADOMASOCHISM.

The jerk is just as weak as the doormat. Both are like parasites feeding off of one another. Relationships are based on what you give and what you get being in some sort of "balance". When that balance changes, how you relate to one another changes... so does the relationship. Usually, it begins to fall apart.

Male or female... one party needs another person to suffer their abuses. It makes him/her feel strong, in control, and loved. The other party needs approval, and often times a difficult subject in order to feel as though they've earned/won something.

But what happens when the masochist starts to feel there wasn't any benefit to all of his/her hard work? All of a sudden this person is angry over the sadist that he/she chose... yet doesn't quite see it that way...

I don't disagree with most of what you're saying, but I do have a bone to pick with you for using sadomasochism as an analogy to abusive relationships.

January 9, 2010

I find myself investing emotionally in new relationships right away, whether it is just a new friend or a prospect date.
I find that the reason I do so is not because I don't know myself (which of course I don't a full 100%) but because i tend to reciprocate my positive attitude towards this person.
As the OP said it takes time to see how this person will react in different situations. In my last relationship that lasted 5 years, i made a mistake of moving in with the guy before I could really know him (after less than 6 months to be exact) only to find out that he wasn't right for me.
So now I am really trying to stay more indifferent towards new people in my life so I can see a clear picture of what the person is. Although I do find it extremely hard to do so, any suggestions?

When I say that we should be careful of becoming emotionally invested too soon, I don't mean that we should be totally distrustful or that we should be totally indifferent.

I'm speaking more towards our expectations. A lot of people seem to go to one extreme or the other. Heavy doubt or intense hope. I think we should always remain positive and hopeful, but just to be careful about those high expectations and trust, which usually stem from those emotional investments.

You can enjoy a person's company, and look forward to seeing that person again. But, there is a need to understand that anything can happen. I think it's down to us remember to keep our excitement and expectations in check. Remembering to separate our hopes or the romanticism of it all from reality.

This intense hurt or feeling of offense comes from past experiences. Yes, we should judge each person individually, but remember that anything is possible during those early phases. And, of course, pay attention.

I was with a guy who I trusted a lot more than I should have considering he actually told me of some of the underhanded things he had done to other people. Not anyone close, that I can recall, and nothing extremely major either. Right there in front of me was a clear sign of what he was capable of, and I didn't see it as I saw my relationship with him as making me somehow more special. As fate would have it, even though he always told me that he would be there for me and had been there for me in every other minor matter... when opportunity came along, he was selfish (and true to his nature). I wasn't looking at all of the right things...

I wasn't looking at him. I was looking at what I got out of the relationship, in terms of how he treated me and made me feel. Granted, I was young at the time, but this is why it's important to know who and what you are going in.

If I were someone different, I could have overlooked his transgressions, or found a way to get even without totally wrecking our friendship. Or, I could have merely accepted it as some flaw of his and swept it under the rug. That's what his current girlfriend does.

In getting to know myself better, I had to look at the things that I might need to change, the things that may never go away, and the good things that I can try to make better. In seeing who I am, it's so much easier now to see others. I don't know myself 100% either, and probably never will. But defining myself as well as what I'm capable of (or not) helps tons.

January 9, 2010

What an odd coincidence that all of the people on here who talk about the significance of attitude are pretty satisfied with their lives, and those who most vehemently reject that concept are pretty pissed off. If I didn't know better, I'd think there was a connection.

I find this interesting as well.

I think, a lot of times, we feel justified in so many things, just as we feel entitled to so many things.

It reminds me of the person hellbent on seeking revenge. You can reason with that person, explaining how revenge won't make anything better, and has the potential to make him/her look foolish (if not totally nuts) in the end... but they're so deeply hurt and afraid that they don't want to look at things in a different manner.

Something has been taken from them, in a manner of speaking, and they seek to regain whatever illusion of that they can manage.

There is nothing wrong with revenge.

But you two summed it up pretty well.

January 9, 2010

I think there is a place in everyone's heart that knows there is a chance, and knows no two people are alike.

I understand how some people are gun shy because they might see some same characteristics from the past. I think it is natural to keep our eyes open. But like you say, acting as if the new person is the enemy doesn't win any hearts over.

January 9, 2010

Does it ever occur to any of you ladies on LS that the reason guys post the same things over and over is not that they "hate" women, but are looking for either a) some sympathy and acceptance that some women do behave badly and irrationally, or b) that there is a rational argument against their position that doesn't consist of the same old cliche' ridden "it's all your attitude" or "you are just a misogynist"?

Well... it could just be me but "I hate women" says a lot. I won't bother to quote Webster's, as I'm sure you know the literal definition of the word.

Hatred usually stems from what? Ahh... yes, a love some kind that caused one pain and suffering. Not always, but often enough. Love of ego, and having it bruised... and so forth.

I think it's pretty obvious that I, personally, have considered the various reasons people post such things. That should be very plain by my original post or that I even took the time to write it all. Now, ask yourself,... have you taken the time to consider why I wrote it. Or, to acknowledge the fact that I included women also?

It's the men here who are turning this into an exclusively male issue. I made a point of mentioning the males foremost only because most of the anger seemed to be coming from males.

And here you are proactively repeating the trite old saw that has a kernel of truth, but is mostly BS. I know, and most men know, that past a certain level of basic human carriage, attitude matters very little when compared to looks, height, and wealth, when attracting women. We know that because... we date and pursue women, over years and decades. YOU DON'T. Yet you keep repeating this platitude as if by repetition it becomes true.

You don't seem to understand as much as you pretend to know. Yes, looks and money can attract lots of people to you. But what types of people are those???

On a regular basis, I have men who express their attraction to me, but it does not mean very much.

This is what you're personally missing. This is what many of the angry people are missing as well. That's the problem. The problem is that materialistic people are obsessed with meeting the material needs of others and little more.

To make matters worse, they SEEK... ACTIVELY SEEK.... 9 times out of 10 some other materialistic person who's expectations they CANNOT meet.

You think you're attractive. You have a nice place, nice car, degree, and you're looking for the same in a woman. But, you know... the guy I call back makes in a week what you make in a month. And still, this is what you want to attract?

That's the problem with our love for our things. There is always someone out there with... well... more and cooler things! I'm not knocking things. I love diamonds as much as the next girl. But I'm the type of woman who gets what she wants, and doesn't rely on a man to buy those things for her.

The problem here is that we're all talking about at least 3 different things. So, let me try to outline this for you:

1. Simple attraction is BS. TOTAL BS. On a daily basis, I attract a lot of things I don't really want. Based on what? Appearances. BS. You guys really need to get over it. It's a pipe dream. I doesn't matter if you have 1000 TVs IF ONLY ONE OF THEM WORKS?

Get it? I really hope so!

The girl who is not into you is not the girl you need to worry about. Sometimes it is about changing aspects of yourself so that you are more agreeable, more approachable, or whathaveyou. Other things about you don't necessarily need to be changed. There is a happy medium to all of this. The fact is that we can never make everyone happy. Going about life wondering what the masses think is rather ridiculous.

If you're a benefit to my life or your affect my finances, you matter. Beyond any of that, there is no point in a person beating himself up because he does not meet some set of general requirements.

This is where attitude and character comes in. This person whose attention you want so badly... who the hell is she that you should even care?

As far as the lecturing tone of the rest of your post, fine, I'm doing some of that myself right now, but when it's the same lecture over and over, do you think it really helps matters? Does it make you feel good to deliver the same trite lecture about repeating mistakes over and over? Aren't these lectures and platitudes clever female blame shifting mechanisms, at least in part?

What has you so hurt? If you don't like it, you don't have to respond. Once again, my original post wasn't directed only at males. Maybe you should re-read it.

Sometimes hearing the same thing in a different way makes a difference. I thought I would give it a try. Does it make me feel good? Stop and ask yourself where your own hostility is coming from?

Defensive much?

January 9, 2010

I don't disagree with most of what you're saying, but I do have a bone to pick with you for using sadomasochism as an analogy to abusive relationships.

Care to share why?

January 9, 2010

meerkat stew

Oops! I forgot I was supposed to outline.

1. Attitude 2. Knowing one's self 3. Patterns

They're all interlocked, so I'll do the best i can.

2. Knowing one's self is important because it has a lot to do with your attitude as well as what you're looking for. This is where your things come in. As I've already asked, does it matter if you have 1000 TVs if only one of them works? We can say that having more TVs increases the odds of something, but the fact remains that some general ability to attract does not mean that your chances improve.

Ugly people get married every day. Poor people get married every day. And, I could go on. The problem, the way I see it, is that people are overly concerned with meeting some ideal. Don't get me wrong. Things are good. Ideals are good. But, people need to re-prioritize.

Yes, general attraction, and the various perks are always a plus, but those things alone do not make you who you are. I think it's easier to accept that maybe you're not tall enough, or maybe you're not fit enough, than to accept that maybe.... it's just YOU.

1. Attitude... I've given the example somewhere in here about the job interview already. An attractive guy with a bad attitude might still get plenty of attention, but from what??? A man with money with a bad attitude is still going to get a lot of attention, but from what?

The problem here is, once again, that the priorities are out of whack. You say attitude doesn't matter... does that mean that you don't care at all about the attitudes of the women you're interested in? They could be awkward or scary or mean... and that just wouldn't matter to you? It's just looks to you? You're willing to put up with an attitude as long as she's really sexy?

Many people are. And then when the b* or jerk decides to act like exactly what he/she is... now everyone is surprised? Hurt? The simple answer is that half of the people are looking for all the wrong things, usually for the wrong reasons, and don't want to see their way out of it. The other times, people just don't get what all the right things are.

Knowing yourself, and properly adjusting you attitude has much to do with two things... 1. what you attract and 2.being able to see the person you're dealing with for what they really are.

3. Patterns -

Since you know it already, then I suppose there's not much need for me to go over this one. But, I will just use this space to go back to attitude, and knowing yourself.

Those are the two things that help you to break out of patterns.

January 9, 2010

meerkat, two things.

1.)You've repeated many times that the guys who come on here to complain about how women are irrational/mean-spirited/what-have-you have some sort of inalienable right to be here, regardless of the fact that they refuse to listen to anyone else's viewpoints or advice.

Inalienable is not a word I use, they have no more nor less a "right" to be here than anyone else. Who has a right to be here is really between the forum owner and the registered members. How do you know they don't listen? Personally, I can vehemently disagree with someone, yet learn a kernel from something they say. But sure people don't listen to posts they find trite or disingenuous, nor is every poster going to follow advice. I don't see the posters in question not listening as much as I see them not being listened to. I see very few of these guys' posts being responded to in anything other than a scornful, trite way.

When people go on a forum simply to "vent" or create controversy with sweeping generalizations about a gender, and refuse to try to change in any way, shape, or form (because they claim they've "tried everything," which I don't doubt for a second is mere self-delusion), this is simply trolling and nothing more. It adds nothing constructive to this message board.

I remember a thread here lately, "build your perfect man," (just one example among many such) where women picked and chose from a grocery list of about 60+ attributes to make their perfect man. We aren't exactly involved in strict scientific inquiry here generally, now are we? There are tons of posts here that could be considered trolling in a loose definition, and singling out posts from a male perspective, even a bitter one, is unfair. Trolling is an overused word, often to describe "posts I don't like." You say tomato, I say tahmahto, you say these guys are trolling, I see many more replies to them that are more obvious trolling.

All you do by supporting these people is perpetuate their victim complexes and make this message board a less pleasant and constructive place to be. These people are venting and trying to point fingers at EVERYONE. How do you not expect people to find this outrageous? Blaming others, blaming a gender, blaming the world is always easier than finding out that the faults lie within you. I've heard people vent about women before, in person and on the internet. There's a HUGE difference between being pissed about some women screwing you over and venting about it once in a while and CONSTANT self-obsessed victimization that borders on mental illness. How exactly do you expect the female posters on LS to hear these kinds of generalizations to NOT want to defend themselves?

For every obnoxious persistent male poster here, I can point out a similar persistent attitude in a female poster, but I don't see me or any of these guys questioning their right to post their condescending, privilged attitude BS. They just shrug it off, which I might suggest is the proper attitude. Look, there are highly moderated relationship forums out there, this is not one of them, and I think that's great. This one seems just about right to me, the mods get rid of spam and blatant abuse of guidelines and otherwise let the net be the net. If a poster is of such delicate sensitivities that they feel compelled to read things and personalize them... on the internet... perhaps this place is not where they need to be. I see lots of women here who are fairly obviously not bothered by any one poster's attitude because they know it doesn't apply to them. They know that every obnoxious or offensive thing they see in the world is not to be taken personally. We aren't exactly talking white supremacy and bomb throwing here, now are we? Fact is, the male POV on politics and the very real distinctions made between genders out and about is routinely shouted down. I'm so glad that strongarm tactic doesn't work here. And frankly, your post is engaging in that exact tactic.

Regardless of whether or not this exists to the extent that you claim it does (and as a man, I don't think so),

You are most welcome to your opinion. Fact is, I have seen almost 0 rational response to my very well-reasoned posts in that area. That's fine, as I am my own harshest critic in that respect. If I want a serious political debate, I will go to a political board, not here. Here it's just blowing off steam.

it doesn't change the fact that everyone, of both genders, has had problems dating and relating to others at some point in their lives. Some take their failures in stride, learn from them, and try to improve continuously. Others place the blame on the world because it's far easier for them to do so. So let's summarize. EVERYONE has had problems with the other gender.

All true for the most part, but you are way overreaching some also, in making unfounded, conclusory statements about these posters, which tends to annoy them further, and rightfully so IMO. Moreover, you didn't deal directly with a single one of my points, just gave a very blanket, generic dismissive response about how these guys are hurting themselves. I suggest that's not something you can determine. This is not a serious therapy forum anyway, so why should you care? People who don't like a particular poster's posts are welcome to ignore them.

January 9, 2010

*raises hand* I know over a dozen men and consider almost all of them my friends. My BFF is a guy. He is awesome. My female friends tend to be selfish and talk to me only when they need advice.... Being around guys allows for me to be my loud, goofy, and colorful self.

This is the irony. Don't know for sure, but would wager heavily, that many of the women who try to shout down and bully certain posters here sit around in their external groups and run women and men down. All my female family and friends do it. It's not a huge focus of their lives, but they do it. My aunt's very blunt attitude about women makes me blush. Does she hate women? No, her best friends are women. Do people call her a misogynist? Of course not. She says the same things over and over, do people try to put a gag on her because she repeats herself? Of course not, they just don't listen if they don't want to. BTW, she is one of the coolest, wisest, most accomplished, most fun people I know with an incredibly positive attitude about life.

So ladies, is DiscoChick here a misogynist? I don't think so, she is just someone who enjoys her male friends more than her female friends. Is her disdain for certain of her female friends' habits indicative of "hatred?" Of course not.

What this boils down to is that there is a pervasive campaign on this board to persecute and shout down male posters who gripe about women. No similar pressure exists on any other type of poster. This thread is pretty much an extension of that campaign.

January 9, 2010

That the woman in this scenario would be surprised makes her naive, but I don't see anything wrong with hoping for people to be good. If they turn out to be not good, then we can deal with that when it happens.

Also, if I treated everyone as someone who has the potential to screw me over, I would stop talking to other people altogether.

I'm not speaking of you specifically. I'm speaking of those who end up in those situations (often repeatedly) and come out jaded on the other side. Not just that scenario, but a variety of situations in which the person did not realize what they were walking into.

It's usually more clear when we're looking at what someone else is going through. But when we walk into situations without a clear understanding of certain things, we not only repeat or own mistakes, but we repeat the mistakes that we even advised our others against.

I don't understand what you mean here.

"There's a difference between knowing that a person doesn't behave as you would have him/her behave ideally, and putting that behavior in terms of "inconsiderate" or "apathetic". And then, making it more specific."

A lot of times we have our own ideas and expectations for how things will or should work out. Ideals...

Let me try this...

Instead of my view of the situation merely being disappointed with his behavior, it would be me looking at who he is or isn't.

Guy takes girl to fast food joint because he has some fear of being taken advantage of by another woman. Woman does not like this behavior, but is looking at all of the positives. "I don't like that he did this but..." Instead of "Emotional immaturity".

If I would honestly define myself as "emotionally mature" and am looking for a mate who is the same... even before date one, I might see that the situation is more than just a difference in perspective or personality. It is now that this person does not meet a requirement, because this person lacks some level of emotional maturity. That's just one example.

Every man can be an inconsiderate jerk sometimes, but does he do it on purpose, was it a mistake or a misunderstanding, etc.? How often does it happen?

This is where understanding yourself comes in. This is why knowing yourself as I put or those "definitions" (lol for lack of better terms) are important. If I know that, to me, it's courteous to always respond promptly, when another person is very casual about such things... it doesn't necessarily mean that this guy is, by definition a jerk. It's just a matter of me knowing who I am and what I require.

It might be that I need to become more relaxed in my expectations of others. Or, it could me that I need to stay out of situations where my expectations cannot be met. Some times are more important than others. As such, we need to know what is what, and of those things what can be compromised.

I don't know what "looping back" means either. Sorry.

You were basically saying things that were inherent, or implied as part of your argument.

Kindness is something that we all should be shown and certainly something that should be reciprocated, regardless of circumstances. Of course people are going to be angry if they are being treated in a rude way.

There is disappointed and there is outraged. I'm speaking about the intense feelings. Disappointed, sad, etc... but what I'm seeing is a lot of people who are being hurt by things they could have seen coming.

It's like standing in the middle of the street and being mad at the driver who hit you. That doesn't make the driver right, but it does make you rather silly when you refuse to see your own part in what happened.

Could you give a few examples, please?

One example would be having the wrong expectations. As I've stated elsewhere and here, people with shallow interests going after others who have shallow interests. The cool kid wanting the girl who is even cooler, so to speak.

Basically, when people aren't really looking at WHO a person is, they're getting themselves all worked up over nothing. Earthy chick wants pretty boy and pretty boy wants status climber trendy chick. Both rejected, and neither can see why. That's just one, and it almost never appears to be as extreme to the person in the situation as the example I've just given.

I think that different expectations and different lifestyles would become issues before people get into a relationship.

Granted, I had that happen to me once, but I was still a student back then and the differences regarding lifestyles (monetary issues) weren't that easy to detect.

Sometimes the issues happen while dating, before a real relationship is established, sometimes in the relationship, sometimes while trying to get the date.

What statement would you have made then?

I think first and foremost the changes should be made to be happy, and to improve your own quality of life. To reduce the stress and such in your life. There is a thin line... It's not just a matter of changing yourself to be like them or so that they will like you. Those who tried to get there by being fake learned that it was a lot of hard work for very little gain.

If you're a classic geek, I don't think it's necessary that you should try to transform yourself and all of your personality so that you're appealing to as many people as possible. However, in changing your attitude and being happy, you'll attract more of the right people to you. And, I'm not sure why, but a lot of people don't want to see that not every single person out there is... the right kind of person.

When they're treated poorly, it's viewed as some general issue with the world around them, and not with those particular individuals. It can't be that they need to examine their personalities and how other's perceive them, it's the masses... When they do look at themselves, as is clear by all of the hostile responses, they're very reluctant and even defensive when it comes to looking at character. It's more make up, a tighter shirt, ripped abs, shoe lifts, and not calling back too soon.

Accepting what is doesn't necessarily lead to a change in perspective. Our perception will always be our reality. And our reality will shape our perception.

The world is full of people who are fat and happy, poor and happy, under educated and happy. How is this possible? Their reality doesn't sound all that great, yet their perception of it is just fine. You have the people who are thankful for what they have and work for something better, and the people who wallow in upset over what they lack. Both material realities can be the same, but the difference is the perspective. The difference is that one accepts what is and is happy for the good there is, and the other does not accept what is, in constant turmoil over what is missing.

Hmm, I never got bored with the things that made me happy. I believe people can be content with what they have if what they have makes them happy.

It doesn't have to be higher, faster, bigger, etc.

There were achievements that caused that emotion and made me happy. Being good at sports made me happy. And being in a loving relationship made me happy.

I am certainly not happy with my love life if I am not in a loving relationship. I can't replace that happiness with something else.

When I am indifferent towards most people (except for friends and family), it means I don't pay attention to those around me and thus it can't hurt nor help me. If there is no interaction, there is no positive or negative.

January 9, 2010

When I look around here, I see lots of men who hate women, but I haven't noticed a man-hating woman yet! Actually, I've never personally met a woman who hates men.

Now, ask yourself,... have you taken the time to consider why I wrote it. Or, to acknowledge the fact that I included women also? ...It's the men here who are turning this into an exclusively male issue. I made a point of mentioning the males foremost only because most of the anger seemed to be coming from males.

Are you kidding me? How on earth can you logically reconcile the first quote above, from the very first paragraph of your OP, with the second quote? If you had meant to make your OP pan-gender, you would have done so. You are merely backtracking now.

I can't comprehend the rest of your reply, sorry, only know that it doesn't respond at all to any of the points I made in replying to your OP.

Once again, my original post wasn't directed only at males. Maybe you should re-read it.

January 9, 2010

So ladies, is DiscoChick here a misogynist? I don't think so, she is just someone who enjoys her male friends more than her female friends. Is her disdain for certain of her female friends' habits indicative of "hatred?" Of course not.

What this boils down to is that there is a pervasive campaign on this board to persecute and shout down male posters who gripe about women. No similar pressure exists on any other type of poster. This thread is pretty much an extension of that campaign.

This is my last post for today. I've been messing around here for a little too long. LOL, but I guess this is interesting to me.

When a man is "venting" in a very negative way about women in general, and women respond with a similar temperament, who is then considered that the women are "shouting the men down" and being some how... more disagreeable and mean then the type of nonsense to which they're replying? Why the double standard?

Personally, I have more male friends than female friends as well. However, as I stated earlier, one cannot compare a male-female friendship to a female-female friendship as men, naturally treat women differently in almost all cases. They may speak with us about their sexual exploits or other things that they would say to other men, but there isn't the same issue with things such as jealousy (unless the male friend has serious feelings for his female friend).

There aren't the same types of comparisons or people attempting to engage in secret competitions, as men and women aren't exactly on the same playing field.

So, if you're attempting to claim this is some general issue with women, I know for fact that men can be just as jealous, just as underhanded, and everything else as women. People are people, and these things have nothing to do with gender.

Furthermore, what DiscoChick said pales in comparison to some of the horrid things that men have said about women in general in these forums. It is no comparison. I think you're just being defensive because you feel under attack somehow... Possibly because you believe what you THINK was implied has much to do with you and your own attitude.

Good luck with that.

January 9, 2010

But, I will just use this space to go back to attitude, and knowing yourself.

Those are the two things that help you to break out of patterns.

My attitude is fine, thanks though. What I fail to understand is why in your lengthy reply to my reply, you dealt with 0 of the points that I made, and instead continued a bottish sermon on "attitude." If you were going to spend all the time typing that you did, I feel at least some of the points I made were well-reasoned and worthy of a direct reply.

January 9, 2010

Are you kidding me? How on earth can you logically reconcile the first quote above, from the very first paragraph of your OP, with the second quote? If you had meant to make your OP pan-gender, you would have done so. You are merely backtracking now.

I can't comprehend the rest of your reply, sorry, only know that it doesn't respond at all to any of the points I made in replying to your OP.

It does... you're just to hostile to pay attention.

Yes, the opening line. I've already explained that. It's funny to me how the women seemed to pay attention to the entire post, yet many of the men only saw the first line.

I can logically reconcile what I wrote because I know what I wrote, why I wrote it, and I'm not ... in the middle of a hissy fit which is impairing my judgment... *ahem*

Like I said, I mentioned the males foremost because of all the posts by angry men But, as I went on to include both genders in the comments which followed, my intent and meaning was very clear to those who were not emotionally riled to the point of being unable to discern the contents of my post.

So, have you asked yourself why you're so defensive yet?

January 9, 2010

When a man is "venting" in a very negative way about women in general, and women respond with a similar temperament, who is then considered that the women are "shouting the men down" and being some how... more disagreeable and mean then the type of nonsense to which they're replying? Why the double standard?

1. Man unhappy with some aspect of his experience with women makes a venty/ranty post that makes some good points, but may be overgeneralizing (some are, some aren't). 2. Women (and some men) dismiss the man's post out of hand and try to bully and insult the poster for making the post, rather than responding to it. There is no substantive content whatsoever in their replies. 3. Rinse and repeat.

Sorry, this is not a "double standard."

And as before, the rest of your post doesn't respond directly to a single one of my clear, thoughtful (at least I think so) points. You just resort to calling me defensive. Once more... Q...E...D.

January 9, 2010

My attitude is fine, thanks though.

The hell you say! its even more ironic that you answered as though I was speaking of you specifically.

I think I've noticed a trend here.... Why is that?

You're very obviously upset... emotionally upset by all of this.

What I fail to understand is why in your lengthy reply to my reply, you dealt with 0 of the points that I made, and instead continued a bottish sermon on "attitude." If you were going to spend all the time typing that you did, I feel at least some of the points I made were well-reasoned and worthy of a direct reply.

Yes... mudslinging.... You're trying to insult my posts instead of sticking to the issue at hand. Repeatedly, in fact, you've done this. Yet, your claim is that you attitude is just fine? As emotional as you are? Really?

My calling you emotional isn't an attempted insult. It's merely an observation. And for whatever reason, this issue bothers you so much that you not only jumped the gun in making assumptions, but you don't want the even acknowledge what was plainly typed out for you.

I addressed everything you said. If you're really looking for an explanation from me that all I said did not answer, then maybe you ought to rephrase.

January 9, 2010

It does... you're just to hostile to pay attention.

Q...E...D.

Yes, the opening line. I've already explained that. It's funny to me how the women seemed to pay attention to the entire post, yet many of the men only saw the first line.

I read the whole OP. Twice. Newspaper headlines that say "Drought in the Midwest" don't ever list baseball scores do they? Had you wanted to make a balanced post about the importance of attitude, you would most certainly not have written the first paragraph of the OP as you did. Keep rationalizing and backpedaling. Good luck with that.

I can logically reconcile what I wrote because I know what I wrote, why I wrote it, and I'm not ... in the middle of a hissy fit which is impairing my judgment... *ahem*

Sorry, I left my female decoder ring at home today. And as far as "hissy fits" go, shout down more, but will go ahead and tell you, it doesn't work on me... at all.... Q...E...D.

my intent and meaning was very clear to those who were not emotionally riled to the point of being unable to discern the contents of my post.

I get paid lots of real money for my reading comprehension skills, and as far as "emotionally riled?" Q...E...D.

So, have you asked yourself why you're so defensive yet?

Q...E...D. :lmao:

January 9, 2010

Inalienable is not a word I use, they have no more nor less a "right" to be here than anyone else. Who has a right to be here is really between the forum owner and the registered members. How do you know they don't listen? Personally, I can vehemently disagree with someone, yet learn a kernel from something they say. But sure people don't listen to posts they find trite or disingenuous, nor is every poster going to follow advice. I don't see the posters in question not listening as much as I see them not being listened to. I see very few of these guys' posts being responded to in anything other than a scornful, trite way.

Aw bless. My scornful heart grows ten sizes bigger when I read such empathy.

Whenever I encounter any vexatious litigants, I'll be sure to send them along to you for representation.

January 9, 2010

1. Man unhappy with some aspect of his experience with women makes a venty/ranty post that makes some good points, but may be overgeneralizing (some are, some aren't). 2. Women (and some men) dismiss the man's post out of hand and try to bully and insult the poster for making the post, rather than responding to it. There is no substantive content whatsoever in their replies. 3. Rinse and repeat.

Sorry, this is not a "double standard."

Oh, now you want to mention the men too, eh? LOL

And as before, the rest of your post doesn't respond directly to a single one of my clear, thoughtful (at least I think so) points. You just resort to calling me defensive. Once more... Q...E...D.

I responded to what I quoted and made further points... based partially on the reply of DiscoChick. It's all on topic...

Resorted to? Ever since you set keyboard in my thread you've been doing nothing but splashing around various types of insults. My calling you defensive was based on that and your over all tone. That wasn't an attempted insult... it was an observation, which I'm sure that many others can easily make as well. That's the funny thing about attitude... More often than not, it allows other people to see you more clearly than you can see yourself.

January 9, 2010

Am tired of typing out QED. But your replies to my original reply, and the continued attempt to discredit my POV because, as you repeat over and over, I am somehow hyper-emotional and insulting about this issue , are the best possible evidence of the validity of the points I've tried to make in this thread. So thanks for making my case for me. Keep up the good work.

January 9, 2010

Sorry, I left my female decoder ring at home today. And as far as "hissy fits" go, shout down more, but will go ahead and tell you, it doesn't work on me... at all.... Q...E...D.

"shout down more" that's funny. That's what you did in your first post in this thread and what you've been doing ever since. Did you read your first post, btw?

This too is very ironic. You shout down and it's your freedom of expression. Anyone else does what you perceive as shouting down and they're just trying to be mean and heavy handed? Riiiight.

LOL This is going to be my last post to you on this matter. I did not create this thread of this purpose. (Talk about ignoring the points and going off topic.) Good luck with that, sir... and all that other stuff too.

Sign In

The Not-so-secret

Recommended Posts

cognac

PinkToes

and.then.some

DiscoChick

Els

and.then.some

Stockalone

New_Life08

and.then.some

and.then.some

and.then.some

meerkat stew

meerkat stew

and.then.some

meerkat stew

and.then.some

meerkat stew

and.then.some

meerkat stew

and.then.some

meerkat stew

Taramere

and.then.some

meerkat stew

and.then.some

What's New

My Activity Streams

More...