udolipixie Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 Well who would they look to then since they can't look to their parents. You're working on the assumption that they would initially look or primarily look to their parents as role models to follow the standard. Again it's increasingly common that parents often aren't role models or looked to for guidance. Many teenagers I know look to celebrities, peers, porn, romance novels, movies, television shows, and other media for gender relations far more than or instead of their parents.
Woggle Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 You're working on the assumption that they would initially look or primarily look to their parents as role models to follow the standard. Again it's increasingly common that parents often aren't role models or looked to for guidance. Many teenagers I know look to celebrities, peers, porn, romance novels, movies, television shows, and other media for gender relations far more than or instead of their parents. Which explains why relationships are in the state they are in today. 1
joystickd Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 Some gals want nice and some gals want nice and are attracted to the stereotypical nice guy. Guys generally want a nice gal however they don't seem to think saying they 'I want a nice gal' equates to 'be nice and I'll be attracted to you'. Yet often when guys hears gals want nice guys he's not hearing that 'gals want a partner who is nice' but 'be nice and she'll be attracted to you'. Perhaps it's not inconsistency but misintrepretation by the guy as he's not hearing what is said but what he wants to hear. Then when he sees what was actually said playing out in life his response is 'gals don't know what they want', 'don't listen to what a gal says she doesn't know what they want', "this doesn't matter to gals that does'. Not by the guy. Look at some of the lovable losers "nice guys" they do whatever the woman wants and she leaves him for a guy that is not a sucker. Its life women are attracted to challenges. The biggest failure of women in the realm of dating and dating advice is not being well defined and clear cut. This ambiguity allows the woman to absolve herself of accountability. Its on here all the time and the guys that have trouble with women call you all on it and to actually depower what they are actually saying you go with the misogynist name. Which in my opinion is used too freely by women on here. Something like this is the reason men should teach men to be men not some woman.
joystickd Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 You're working on the assumption that they would initially look or primarily look to their parents as role models to follow the standard. Again it's increasingly common that parents often aren't role models or looked to for guidance. Many teenagers I know look to celebrities, peers, porn, romance novels, movies, television shows, and other media for gender relations far more than or instead of their parents. You're working on the assumption that teenagers are not listening to what their parents are saying and not watching what they are doing. Teenagers have a certain mindset and the parents serve as guidance. They look to the things you describe but when they mature they look to the things their parents done and told them. The only reason they have some importance to a teenager is because they have this idealized view of them. I guess if it were left up to you we would have a world where babies are born and the television and internet raise them totally and the parents totally have no involvement. I mean hell that is basically what you are saying in a nutshell now.
udolipixie Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 I look and am beginning to notice this need for some women to desire this blurring of roles. Its wrong and creates confusion. Would any points be scored if everyone was a quarterback on a football team? No there would be no guards, tackles, ends, wide recievers or running backs. Mothers and fathers are a team and they both have different roles in instilling values in children. We look at society and they raise the role of mother higher than the father hell even totally ignore the man's role. I have no problem with feminism overall only with the fringe crazies that permeate in it and as we can see its spreading even to the more moderate feminists. I have always been one to see feminism and racism not as divide and conquer but now as divide and make money off of them. There is more money to be made of division than unity. Turnaround: I look and am beginning to notice this need for some guys to desire this separation and definition of roles. Perhaps it's out of wanting a definite answer of what is masculinity that a guy can work towards rather than defining it for himself. Needing to be told an answer because they're incapable of creating one for themselves or would be lost as they define themselves by their genitals and need a solidarity for it. That they need to be opposite or different from gals because for a guy to be equal to a woman is to be less than. Going by your logic the mother's different role seems to be someone who the father shows how men and women are to interact. As the father is the one who instills the values in both the son & daughter and teaches both how to deal with the opposite sex. It's quite interesting that you end on there is more money to be made of division then unity when not blurring the roles technically is divison rather than unity.
Woggle Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 You're working on the assumption that teenagers are not listening to what their parents are saying and not watching what they are doing. Teenagers have a certain mindset and the parents serve as guidance. They look to the things you describe but when they mature they look to the things their parents done and told them. The only reason they have some importance to a teenager is because they have this idealized view of them. I guess if it were left up to you we would have a world where babies are born and the television and internet raise them totally and the parents totally have no involvement. I mean hell that is basically what you are saying in a nutshell now. I agree. Teenagers might roll their eyes at what their parents say but if it is good parenting when these teens grow up and mature hopefully it will sink in and make sense. When I was 16 and running wild on the streets without my mom giving a damn I thought it was the coolest thing but now I look back and see how awful it was for somebody to care that little for their kid.
sally4sara Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 No one is attracted for very long to anyone who does everything demanded of them. This is not equal to saying women only want bad boys and never want nice guys. Nor does it mean men only want bad girls and never want nice girls. "Nice" also is not so clear cut in definition; "nice" doesn't equal ass kissing. Bad doesn't equal not letting yourself get worked into being a doormat. Nor does continuing individual pursuits that one enjoyed before beginning a relationship, after a beginning a relationship and not letting the relationship control every aspect of your choices or actions equal being "bad". Everyone, male and female, enjoys having a relationship with A PERSON and people are not just a sea of "good" or "bad". We are all both. Suggesting women are attracted to challenges is a short cut to thinking. One where we all fit into little clearly defined boxes. Maybe you are only comfortable when you think you have everyone figured out? I assure you you do not. I'll say again, things in my life would be hella different if I stuck to the example given in my home. And it wouldn't be a good difference.
udolipixie Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 You're working on the assumption that teenagers are not listening to what their parents are saying and not watching what they are doing. Teenagers have a certain mindset and the parents serve as guidance. They look to the things you describe but when they mature they look to the things their parents done and told them. The only reason they have some importance to a teenager is because they have this idealized view of them. I guess if it were left up to you we would have a world where babies are born and the television and internet raise them totally and the parents totally have no involvement. I mean hell that is basically what you are saying in a nutshell now. I'm actually not working on that assumption as I'm Informing you that 'Well who would they look to then since they can't look to their parents'' is assuming that looking to their parents is the default isn't assuming that teens don't listen to or watch their parents. It's actually not working on an any assumption rather I'm being aware of all possible factors and not having a default. How is me informing you stating 'Well who would they look to then since they can't look to their parents' is assuming that they look to their parents bascially saying anything like a world where babies are born and tv and the internet raise them totally?
joystickd Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 Turnaround: I look and am beginning to notice this need for some guys to desire this separation and definition of roles. Perhaps it's out of wanting a definite answer of what is masculinity that a guy can work towards rather than defining it for himself. Needing to be told an answer because they're incapable of creating one for themselves or would be lost as they define themselves by their genitals and need a solidarity for it. That they need to be opposite or different from gals because for a guy to be equal to a woman is to be less than. Going by your logic the mother's different role seems to be someone who the father shows how men and women are to interact. As the father is the one who instills the values in both the son & daughter and teaches both how to deal with the opposite sex. It's quite interesting that you end on there is more money to be made of division then unity when not blurring the roles technically is divison rather than unity. Read what I said I meant feminism and racism not mothers and fathers big difference there. Try reading sometimes it helps with responding more coherently. I didnt really elaborate on a mother's role because this is a thread about men. You and the women on this thread attempt to negate the father's role and I only defended the role. That is all I am doing. Maybe just maybe if there was a thread on the importance of mother and father I would talk about it, but I was defending fathers here from the load of horse s**t about reconciling humanity and whatever else you said. rec·on·cile [rek-uhn-sahyl] Show IPA verb, rec·on·ciled, rec·on·cil·ing. verb (used with object) 1. to cause (a person) to accept or be resigned to something not desired: He was reconciled to his fate. 2. to win over to friendliness; cause to become amicable: to reconcile hostile persons. 3. to compose or settle (a quarrel, dispute, etc.). 4. to bring into agreement or harmony; make compatible or consistent: to reconcile differing statements; to reconcile accounts. 5. to reconsecrate (a desecrated church, cemetery, etc.). 6. to restore (an excommunicate or penitent) to communion in a church. Looking at the definition of reconcile I mean hell the very concept you are talking about is illogical in the realm of teaching manhood. I think everyone accepts that they are human. I think no one can compose being a human. I think everyone is consistently human. I am 100% sure human are churches. Time to pull something else out of your ___ and attempt to convince us that its a excellent way to teach manhood. Maybe you can talk to the company that make Rosetta Stone since they have are great at teaching foreign languages
udolipixie Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 Not by the guy. Look at some of the lovable losers "nice guys" they do whatever the woman wants and she leaves him for a guy that is not a sucker. Its life women are attracted to challenges. The biggest failure of women in the realm of dating and dating advice is not being well defined and clear cut. This ambiguity allows the woman to absolve herself of accountability. Its on here all the time and the guys that have trouble with women call you all on it and to actually depower what they are actually saying you go with the misogynist name. Which in my opinion is used too freely by women on here. Something like this is the reason men should teach men to be men not some woman. What is not by the guy? If you mean misintrepretation it is if the guy is being nice because he thinks it'll make gals attracted to her as that's equating 'gals want a partner who is nice' to 'be nice and she'll be attracted to you'. It's also likely gender different definitions of 'nice' if being what seems to be a pushover doormat is what guys define as nice by your logic.
joystickd Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 What is not by the guy? If you mean misintrepretation it is if the guy is being nice because he thinks it'll make gals attracted to her as that's equating 'gals want a partner who is nice' to 'be nice and she'll be attracted to you'. It's also likely gender different definitions of 'nice' if being what seems to be a pushover doormat is what guys define as nice by your logic. Its very simple to say I want a guy that is not a pushover. Try it and different results just might occur
udolipixie Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 (edited) Read what I said I meant feminism and racism not mothers and fathers big difference there. Try reading sometimes it helps with responding more coherently. I didnt really elaborate on a mother's role because this is a thread about men. You and the women on this thread attempt to negate the father's role and I only defended the role. That is all I am doing. Maybe just maybe if there was a thread on the importance of mother and father I would talk about it, but I was defending fathers here from the load of horse s**t about reconciling humanity and whatever else you said. rec·on·cile [rek-uhn-sahyl] Show IPA verb, rec·on·ciled, rec·on·cil·ing. verb (used with object) 1. to cause (a person) to accept or be resigned to something not desired: He was reconciled to his fate. 2. to win over to friendliness; cause to become amicable: to reconcile hostile persons. 3. to compose or settle (a quarrel, dispute, etc.). 4. to bring into agreement or harmony; make compatible or consistent: to reconcile differing statements; to reconcile accounts. 5. to reconsecrate (a desecrated church, cemetery, etc.). 6. to restore (an excommunicate or penitent) to communion in a church. Looking at the definition of reconcile I mean hell the very concept you are talking about is illogical in the realm of teaching manhood. I think everyone accepts that they are human. I think no one can compose being a human. I think everyone is consistently human. I am 100% sure human are churches. Time to pull something else out of your ___ and attempt to convince us that its a excellent way to teach manhood. Maybe you can talk to the company that make Rosetta Stone since they have are great at teaching foreign languages Interesting that you tell me to try reading sometimes to help with responding more coherently when you had been responding and arguing to your intrepretation of my words and when informed you told me you don't give a f*ck. Telling how often you switch topics, ad hominem, respond based on your intrepretation rather than what was said, and attack spelling rather than the argument. I'm attempting to negate the father's role by stating the rule is guys with single mothers have no man to teach him how to be a man is overlooking other male figures in his life such as grandfathers, uncles, male cousins, and male role models. So to you negating the father's role one doesn't have to state that others are equal subtitute and compare in the teaching just that it's possible for those other than the father to teach a guy how to be a man. Nowhere did I state, imply, or suggest it'll replace, be just as good, or such. You were defending fathers here from my answer that a guy with poor male role models would probably be best suited to 'be a person first be a gender second' as in consider what type of person you want to be then what type of man. As for looking at the definition of reconcile my concept is illogical in teaching manhood seems like you only looked at the definition that suited your agenda: Reconcile: 2. To settle or resolve. Perhaps you should as you advised and try reading sometimes it helps with responding more coherently: consider the male who has poor role models instead, and only has women in his life. How does he reconcile his masculinity? And furthermore, how does he define masculinity? The guy who has poor male role models would probably be best suited to reconcile his humanity first then gender identity by considering what type of person he wishes to be (honorable, loyal, faithful, deceptive, manipulative). I'm of a "be a person first be a gender second" mindset. He'd define his masculinity by choosing the role he sees available for his gender or through dynamic he desires in a romantic/sexual relationship if he wants such. *italics for editing Edited May 27, 2012 by udolipixie
joystickd Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 Interesting that you tell me to try reading sometimes to help with responding more coherently when you had been responding and arguing to your intrepretation of my words and when informed you told me you don't give a f*ck. Telling how often you switch topics, ad hominem, respond based on your intrepretation rather than what was said, and attack spelling rather than the argument. I'm attempting to negate the father's role by stating the rule is guys with single mothers have no man to teach him how to be a man is overlooking other male figures in his life such as grandfathers, uncles, male cousins, and male role models. To you negating the father's role one doesn't have to state that others are equal subtitute and compare in the teaching just that it's possible for those other than the father to teach a guy how to be a man. Nowhere did I state, imply, or suggest it'll replace, be just as good, or such. You were defending fathers here from my view of being a person first gender second as in consider what type of person you want to be then what type of wo/man as an answer to what should a guy with poor male role models do? Seems like you only looked at the definition that suited your agenda: Reconcile: 2. To settle or resolve. Perhaps you should as you advised and try reading sometimes it helps with responding more coherently: there is nothing in humanity to settle or resolve so the thing you pulled out of your __ makes not sense trust me I read and read well. That is why I said you pulled it out of your ass. Please read I said I don't give a f**k about a strawman damn were you born under a rock or something hell. Its look like feminists would give you a better education. You try to add all this "logic" and analyze my arguments. I think you have pulled out of you ass enough. I have no more to say to you. I mean hell did you get an orgasm from pulling all of that out of your ass
udolipixie Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 Its very simple to say I want a guy that is not a pushover. Try it and different results just might occur Interesting so from your experiences guys generally think 'nice' means being a pushover so gals are best suited to say they don't want a guy who is a pushoverto get the result of guys not seeing 'be nice' as 'be a pushover'?
joystickd Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 Interesting so from your experiences guys generally think 'nice' means being a pushover so gals are best suited to say they don't want a guy who is a pushoverto get the result of guys not seeing 'be nice' as 'be a pushover'? damn you want me to do a visual representation of what I am talking about. Are you stupid or something? I said what I said no need for me to restate
udolipixie Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 there is nothing in humanity to settle or resolve so the thing you pulled out of your __ makes not sense trust me I read and read well. That is why I said you pulled it out of your ass. Please read I said I don't give a f**k about a strawman damn were you born under a rock or something hell. Its look like feminists would give you a better education. You try to add all this "logic" and analyze my arguments. I think you have pulled out of you ass enough. I have no more to say to you. I mean hell did you get an orgasm from pulling all of that out of your ass I know you don't give a f*ck about responding based on your intrepretations rather than what was stated and making illogical. I was just pointing out that it's interesting how you tell me to try reading so I'll respond coherently when you don't read but intrepret then respond with illogical and irrational arguments based on that intrepretation then when informed of that you said you didn't give a f*ck.
udolipixie Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 there is nothing in humanity to settle or resolve so the thing you pulled out of your __ makes not sense trust me I read and read well. That is why I said you pulled it out of your ass. Please read I said I don't give a f**k about a strawman damn were you born under a rock or something hell. Its look like feminists would give you a better education. You try to add all this "logic" and analyze my arguments. I think you have pulled out of you ass enough. I have no more to say to you. I mean hell did you get an orgasm from pulling all of that out of your ass Apparently you don't read or read well as I'm not stating there is something in humanity to settle or resolve I am stating how one reconciles with their humanity. The former states there is a problem in humanity that needs to be resolved while the latter states how does one resolve what it means to be human. I'm not stating there is something in humanity to settle or resolve. I'm am stating how I think a guy who has poor male role models would be best suited to reconcile (resolve/settle) his masculinity by first reconcile with his humanity. Though my reconcilation is less existential and about what kind of person you want to be that it'd be best suited to consider what kind of person he wants to be then what kind of man. consider the male who has poor role models instead, and only has women in his life. How does he reconcile his masculinity? And furthermore, how does he define masculinity? The guy who has poor male role models would probably be best suited to reconcile his humanity first then gender identity by considering what type of person he wishes to be (honorable, loyal, faithful, deceptive, manipulative). I'm of a "be a person first be a gender second" mindset. He'd define his masculinity by choosing the role he sees available for his gender or through dynamic he desires in a romantic/sexual relationship if he wants such. *italics for editing
joystickd Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 I'm am stating how I think a guy who has poor male role models would be best suited to reconcile (resolve/settle) his masculinity by first reconcile with his humanity. Though my reconcilation is less existential and about what kind of person you want to be that it'd be best suited to consider what kind of person he wants to be then what kind of man. Newsflash I think we all know we are human so the focus should be on masculinity. I have read but I am not as illogical and not understanding of masculinity as you to assume such and pull such illogical concepts that have less value than BM. Like I said men teach men how to be men. Its that simple women teach women to be women but men establish the tone for relationship with men and they instill values and beliefs about relationships with men. Its what I have been saying this whole time but your brain I guess cannot comprehend it. I cannot handle discussing such matters with someone who cannot comprehend simple concepts. Maybe one day I will be able to give you coloring books with picture of what I am talking about so one day you can color and ACTUALLY understand something. I will give a pack of 8 crayons too. 16, 32 or even 48 maybe a little too much for you to handle.
udolipixie Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 damn you want me to do a visual representation of what I am talking about. Are you stupid or something? I said what I said no need for me to restate Interesting it's stupid to question from your experiences how many guys define nice as a pushover if you're advising gals to say they don't want a guy who is a pushover to get the result of guys not seeing nice as pushover. No visual representation is needed this says it all: Guys generally want a nice gal however they don't seem to think saying they 'I want a nice gal' equates to 'be nice and I'll be attracted to you'. Yet often when guys hears gals want nice guys he's not hearing that 'gals want a partner who is nice' but 'be nice and she'll be attracted to you'. Perhaps it's not inconsistency but misintrepretation by the guy as he's not hearing what is said but what he wants to hear. Then when he sees what was actually said playing out in life his response is 'gals don't know what they want', 'don't listen to what a gal says she doesn't know what they want', "this doesn't matter to gals that does'. Not by the guy. Look at some of the lovable losers "nice guys" they do whatever the woman wants and she leaves him for a guy that is not a sucker. Its life women are attracted to challenges. The biggest failure of women in the realm of dating and dating advice is not being well defined and clear cut. This ambiguity allows the woman to absolve herself of accountability. Its on here all the time and the guys that have trouble with women call you all on it and to actually depower what they are actually saying you go with the misogynist name. Which in my opinion is used too freely by women on here. Something like this is the reason men should teach men to be men not some woman. What is not by the guy? If you mean misintrepretation it is if the guy is being nice because he thinks it'll make gals attracted to her as that's equating 'gals want a partner who is nice' to 'be nice and she'll be attracted to you'. It's also likely gender different definitions of 'nice' if being what seems to be a pushover doormat is what guys define as nice by your logic. Its very simple to say I want a guy that is not a pushover. Try it and different results just might occur Interesting so from your experiences guys generally think 'nice' means being a pushover so gals are best suited to say they don't want a guy who is a pushoverto get the result of guys not seeing 'be nice' as 'be a pushover'?
joystickd Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 Interesting it's stupid to question from your experiences how many guys define nice as a pushover if you're advising gals to say they don't want a guy who is a pushover to get the result of guys not seeing nice as pushover. No visual representation is needed this says it all: You will never get it. Like I said momma was wrong and nothing will change that. You can show quotes all you want but it doesn't change the fact that women are inconsistent to men on the level of dating and attraction. Its clear that all women have to do is say I don't want a pushover, but women prefer the ambiguity so it can be misinterpreted and when called on it avoid accountability and say its the man's fault when in reality all women have to do is just be clear about what they want. Is that a foreign concept for you to understand? I hope its simple enough for you, but at the rate you are going I think its not.
udolipixie Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 Newsflash I think we all know we are human so the focus should be on masculinity. I have read but I am not as illogical and not understanding of masculinity as you to assume such and pull such illogical concepts that have less value than BM. Like I said men teach men how to be men. Its that simple women teach women to be women but men establish the tone for relationship with men and they instill values and beliefs about relationships with men. Its what I have been saying this whole time but your brain I guess cannot comprehend it. I cannot handle discussing such matters with someone who cannot comprehend simple concepts. Maybe one day I will be able to give you coloring books with picture of what I am talking about so one day you can color and ACTUALLY understand something. I will give a pack of 8 crayons too. 16, 32 or even 48 maybe a little too much for you to handle. Seems to be a newsflash to you that many know they are human but don't know or question what it means to be human. Though as I stated my reconcilation is less existential than 'what it means to be human' but rather is 'what kind of person do I want to be'. Seems women teach women to be women incompetently as by your logic the role of the father is to the father is needed for her to recognize her value as a woman and she looks to him for affection, respect and affirmation of her femininity. Absolutely amusing how after basing your arguments on your intrepretation of my words and when informed so you tell me you don't a f*ck that you tell me about understanding what someone says. I understand what you said I even posted several recaps: Daughters need their fathers to learn to deal with guys. Mothers can do that but it's hard without a visual example I thought the mother dealing with guys would be an example however visual example means directly dealing with an opposite gender parent. Sons need their fathers to learn to deal with gals. Mothers can't do that for their sons as 'when it comes to dating momma was wrong' and what mothers say is a source of problems and on some level wrong. Dealing with an opposite gender parent isn't important for guys in this case and actually a hinderance. Daughters need their fathers to recognize their value as a woman and to instill values such as independence and not taking bad behavior. Mothers can do that but it's hard without a visual example which means directly dealing with an opposite gender parent though I'm unsure why. Sons need their fathers to learn to be a man.
joystickd Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 Seems to be a newsflash to you that many know they are human but don't know or question what it means to be human. Though as I stated my reconcilation is less existential than 'what it means to be human' but rather is 'what kind of person do I want to be'. Seems women teach women to be women incompetently as by your logic the role of the father is to the father is needed for her to recognize her value as a woman and she looks to him for affection, respect and affirmation of her femininity. Absolutely amusing how after basing your arguments on your intrepretation of my words and when informed so you tell me you don't a f*ck that you tell me about understanding what someone says. I understand what you said I even posted several recaps: Daughters need their fathers to learn to deal with guys. Mothers can do that but it's hard without a visual example I thought the mother dealing with guys would be an example however visual example means directly dealing with an opposite gender parent. Sons need their fathers to learn to deal with gals. Mothers can't do that for their sons as 'when it comes to dating momma was wrong' and what mothers say is a source of problems and on some level wrong. Dealing with an opposite gender parent isn't important for guys in this case and actually a hinderance. Daughters need their fathers to recognize their value as a woman and to instill values such as independence and not taking bad behavior. Mothers can do that but it's hard without a visual example which means directly dealing with an opposite gender parent though I'm unsure why. Sons need their fathers to learn to be a man. Recap are for your benefit only. I guess you need to remember what I said. Create a mnemonic device so you can remember better:lmao:
sally4sara Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 You will never get it. Like I said momma was wrong and nothing will change that. You can show quotes all you want but it doesn't change the fact that women are inconsistent to men on the level of dating and attraction. Its clear that all women have to do is say I don't want a pushover, but women prefer the ambiguity so it can be misinterpreted and when called on it avoid accountability and say its the man's fault when in reality all women have to do is just be clear about what they want. Is that a foreign concept for you to understand? I hope its simple enough for you, but at the rate you are going I think its not. Will you ever get that you have not dated all women nor do you even know all women or what all women have done in all relationships? Calling anything you've decided based on your relatively tiny slice of personal experience a fact only stands to show how dim you are and how incapable you will be of giving women credit in anything. I find you guilty of believing your experiences make you an authority on this subject; you're acting like what you believe is what ubermensch should believe. If someone has trouble understanding anything you've had to say it is because everything you've had to say has been rooted in the irrational. You are a shining example of how having a **** male role model can be worse than having none as any young man unfortunate enough to have to rely on you for advise, guidance or wisdom in anyway related to "how to be a man" would end up a stunted fool for listening and woe to any girl who gives him a fair chance. 1
udolipixie Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 You will never get it. Like I said momma was wrong and nothing will change that. You can show quotes all you want but it doesn't change the fact that women are inconsistent to men on the level of dating and attraction. Its clear that all women have to do is say I don't want a pushover, but women prefer the ambiguity so it can be misinterpreted and when called on it avoid accountability and say its the man's fault when in reality all women have to do is just be clear about what they want. Is that a foreign concept for you to understand? I hope its simple enough for you, but at the rate you are going I think its not. Momma likely wasn't wrong just that guys heard what they wanted to hear. Guys generally want a nice gal and they don't seem to think saying they 'I want a nice gal' equates to 'be nice and I'll be attracted to her'. Yet often when guys hear 'I want a nice guy' they equate it to 'be nice and I'll be attracted to you'. It's likely not clear to many gals that when they say 'I want a nice guy' she should include 'I don't want a pushover' as many don't define being nice as being a pushover. Having a different definition of nice than guys is gals trying to confuse guys with ambiguity rather than different definitions. Not responding to guy's definition of nice in the way the guy wants is gals trying to evade accountability. Stating it's misintrepretation and different definitions is say it's all the guy's fault.
joystickd Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 Will you ever get that you have not dated all women nor do you even know all women or what all women have done in all relationships? Calling anything you've decided based on your relatively tiny slice of personal experience a fact only stands to show how dim you are and how incapable you will be of giving women credit in anything. I find you guilty of believing your experiences make you an authority on this subject; you're acting like what you believe is what ubermensch should believe. If someone has trouble understanding anything you've had to say it is because everything you've had to say has been rooted in the irrational. You are a shining example of how having a **** male role model can be worse than having none as any young man unfortunate enough to have to rely on you for advise, guidance or wisdom in anyway related to "how to be a man" would end up a stunted fool for listening and woe to any girl who gives him a fair chance. I can say what I say because I am not at a stage in my life where I have the capacity to mentor anyone so essentially I am not a shining example more like a very dull one. You know like a dull knife where you have to force it to cut and you end up cutting yourself
Recommended Posts