Can women be responsible for men's misogynistic view of dating?

[Taramere]

I'm still trying to wrap my mind around why women would give up the multi-faceted, well-rounded, tenaciously talented (due to the massive amount of leisure time women enjoyed thanks to men) and strong exclusively female form of empowerment, admired by most men, such as Victorian womanhood, and trade it in for duckface pictures and men seeing you as nothing but a penishole. Can any of you broads sew or create beautiful finishings on furniture like Victorian women? Nope. But you can sure emulate the lowest and most pathetic characteristics at the bottom of the male barrel. (most things with a penis nowadays are not men, either, we are all fallen from our divinity)

 

All you have to do is look at the schooling of Thomas Jefferson's daughters. How many "liberated" and "unbridled" women would even be able to keep up with little 8 year old Patsy Jefferson? Not many, her education did not really cover knowledge of different types of dildos and BDSM novels.

 

Instead of being empowered as women, women choose (or rather, a small minority of social engineers who have captivated women with lies) to be empowered by...trying to copy men? The ancient Greeks saw their archetypes as ideals to strive for but which could never be achieved, they were called Gods. What is the modern state of gender relations with female copy cats other than flaunting male superiority while simultaneously bashing masculinity?

 

 

I'm sure some woman is going to report this post for its offensive truths (despite me criticizing both men and women, but this thread is more about women), some things won't ever change no matter what the circus ringleaders seek to create.

 

Actually, although of the Edwardian rather than Victorian period, I think I'd have done quite nicely in a Jane Austen setting. Admittedly sewing, knitting and crocheting were never strong points for me (we had to do that stuff in primary school, and I can still remember the teacher holding up my knitting for the rest of the class to laugh at), but I can certainly picture myself whiling the days away playing the pianoforte, reading books, receiving visitors for tea and going for country walks. Perhaps dabbling in the odd painting or attempting to write a book.

 

Unfortunately the reality for most women back then would have involved scrubbing their life away as a servant girl while the prospect of the workhouse or life as a prostitute - ending, eventually, in a nightmare of syphilis - grew ever closer. Especially if the master of the house happened to get them pregnant. The past may well have been rosy, but only for a fortunate few.

[somedude81]

I've heard several accounts from bi-sexual women that trying to have a relationship with a woman is a pain in the ass compared to being in one with a man. That includes trying to get dates.

 

Talking from my own experience, trying and failing with women over and over does lead to misogynistic views. Though I currently hate myself much more than women.

[Mme. Chaucer]

The point was that back then women had a culture to aspire to, today women just try to mimmick men, which is never going to work. Any political or public institution that has a lot of women in it is already on its last legs.

 

I promise you that we aren't trying to miimmic men. At least, not any of the women I know.

 

And the comment about the last legs? You make yourself look very peevish when you write such drek. You should try to stop.

 

In fact, the number of Fortune 500 companies with women at the helm has been increasing every year, going from 12 in 2011 to 18 this year.

 

Women so rock! I love us! Lots of men do, too, and I love them back!

[jakelongot]

I'm just giving you the response you want to hear. Which is basically, it's women's fault if men are misognistic. I am scratching my head over the idea that I have "flew off the handle". Aren't you the one that suggested this was the case? That it's women's fault if men are misognistic?

 

I thought I was starting a discussion in this thread? I asked a question, cited and example and opened the topic to discussion.

 

You, instead of starting a logical argument to agree with or dispute the example instead simply get emotional about it and attack me. As I mentioned, i seen several posts from you on various threads and they all have the common thread of attacking or labeling someone rather than actually structuring an intelligable argument.

 

Never once in this thread have I attacked women. I have simply put a question out there to discuss.

[utterer of lies]

It's naturally always women's fault because women are evil hateful people that want to crush the living beating hearts of kind generous wonderful men.

 

It's perfectly fine to crush the wonderful men as long as you still submit to the evil bastards.

[Taramere]

You mean you wouldn't prefer to slave away at a service job like most "liberated" women do?!?

 

No. I would prefer to work 18 hours a week, one third of it feeable, and keep my overheads low so that I can live comfortably without working any more than that, and have the rest of the time to do whatever I want. I like work, just not too much of it.

 

 

What, poverty and disease are specifically female or victorian? Most people today are barely making it, doing humiliating jobs, and I doubt STD rates are lower now than they were back then (though I wouldn't know how to prove that). Males were in the same boat as women, except instead of being servants they were mining for 18 hours a day or on the frontlines of some foreign battlefield.

 

Men weren't in quite the same boat. Not in the UK, in Victorian times, at least. STDs certainly were a huge problem back then. The servicemen you mention were riddled with them, and so the notorious contagious diseases legislation was brought in.

 

Under that legislation, any woman suspected of being a prostitute would be seized and subjected to an intimate medical examination. The same rule didn't apply to men. Public outrage about that double standard was one of the major historical triggers for an increased awareness of women's issues.

 

That is besides the point. The point was that back then women had a culture to aspire to

 

The culture middle class women aspired to would seem to have involved a combination of managing domestic and social relations, and contributing to the popular philanthropic movement. All matters which would, one way or another, lead them towards an interest in what we now describe as feminist issues.

[2.50 a gallon]

I am a baby boomer, as is my younger sister. As a male the world was my oyster, I could aspire to almost anything, from railroad engineer, to test pilot, Indy car driver, doctor, lawyer or even president.

 

As a girl she had few choices, home maker, secretary, nurse school teacher.

 

Why should she not have the same choices that I had?

[jcrew11]

Interesting topic. I think there are more bitter men than bitter women. But I think the "rules of dating" have changed in the past few decades. I think this is due to contraception and the pill, which makes casual short term relationships okay for both Men and Women.

 

Men don't have to grow up as "future husbands/fathers" if they can just have ONS and STR with many women. So the few Alpha Male (Brad Pitts) become players sleeping with many women. But these same women become bitter because they can never tie down these Alpha Males.

 

Meanwhile, the Beta Males are rejected by the girls chasing Alpha Males. So no one is happy, and no one can grow up into Fatherhood/Marriage.

[betterdeal]

What public/government institution is better (more efficient) because of women flooding it?

 

Some would say the entire government and industry when Thatcher swept away the cosy old-school tie brigade and the beer and sandwiches unionists in her 13 year tenure, dragging Britain by its heels from going cap in hand to the IMF into making a budget surplus, privatising previously nationalised industries, revolutionising the financial markets and fending off a completely unprovoked invasion on the other side of the world.

 

Elizabeth I is generally credited with being instrumental in the birth of the modern era, creating a peaceable arrangement that ended the chronic religious wars in England, putting politics above church in the governance of the state, encouraging innovation, intellectualism and commerce above feudalism and bankruptcy, and therefore sowed the seeds for the scientific and industrial revolutions.

 

Angela Merkel appears to be running a pretty tight ship in Germany with low inflation, budget surpluses, an export-rich economy and enough spare cash to buy southern Europe.

Edited September 29, 2012 by betterdeal

[Mme. Chaucer]

What do you call a woman wearing a business suit with a short man's haircut then? What do you call women trying to take dominant positions in government and economy? These have been male roles for almost all of history, to have that this way would be just as awkward as a man breast feeding a baby or knitting you socks.

 

You're joking, right?

 

I call women who dress however they want to … women who dress however they want to. I call women who kick ass in government and economy, business, academia, or whatever, awesome people who are obviously following their passion and who are good at what they do.

 

Why don't you answer my question? What public/government institution is better (more efficient) because of women flooding it?

 

Well, maybe every single institution that has flourished since women entered the mainstream workforce? I would google and make a list, but you could do that yourself if you were interested in knowledge or facts - clearly not the case!

 

So what? I have 0 respect for most people on the Fortune 500, most corporate CEO's sit in their office watching TV or snorting coke while their underlings do all the hard work. They're figure heads that get paid to be so, kind of like the Queen of England.

 

Well, obviously you don't have any knowledge about business, so I guess your fantasy about the preponderance of TV watching, coke sniffing CEO's is just whimsy.

 

Have you actually entered the workforce in any capacity so far in your life? You just come off as so … sheltered from reality.

 

Women do rock...when they are great mothers and wives, warm nurturers, talented and complex in their own female culture.

 

Sorry, Dr. Gobbles, but we don't have "our own female culture." We are a part of culture in its entirety. Those of us who have "taken" "YOUR" jobs have been able to do so because we are immeasurably superior at doing the job than you were. Meanwhile, you just keep sitting there spinning your farfetched fairy tales about the horrifying armies of buzzcut women and coke snorting CEO's. They are amusing, though kind of pathetic.

Edited September 29, 2012 by Mme. Chaucer

[loveunlimited]

I have never encountered Dr Goebbels. I have never had dialogue with him, communicated with him, or been in a discussion with him.

I have already put him on Ignore. I don't like him, at all.

[Emilia]

Women as a whole should not be in politics, academia, or economy. Should great women be in it? Sure, nothing should stop them if they truly have a talent for it. But the women involved in such fields today, are not intellectually qualified for it. Why don't you look up the bankruptcy rate of female businesses vs male businesses if you don't believe me?

 

I'm guessing this view will change once you manage to get a girlfriend

[irc333]

You have to admit, women haven't mad it EASIER on men these days, as well as women have their own challenges and attitudes toward dating men.

[Mme. Chaucer]

Back then, women had a female culture because it was empowering to be a woman, they were creative. Today, women are ashamed of what they are, so they just try to act like men. I'd like to see chattery, credit-card abusing penisholes that compose the majority of modern "empowered" women have even half the talents of a 17th century Puritan woman. Oh yeah , P.S. , read the diaries of those Puritan women, they were a lot happier in their lives than you are.

 

Yeah! And the "Negroes" were all very jolly under slavery too! All that dancing and smiling! Back then, "they" had it good! Now, "they" are ashamed of what "they" are, and so they just try to act like white people!

 

Oh, yeah, P.S., read "Uncle Tom's Cabin," Pat Buchannen and Michele Bachman, David Duke, and Stormfront to find proof of how much happier "Negroes" were under slavery.

 

(Note to anybody: I am not comparing Blacks in slavery to women in America at any historical period. I am comparing the lameness of a bigoted, ignorant voice booming out to "tell it like it is" for and about the group of people who they're prejudiced against.)

 

P.S. I'm sure there were plenty of Puritan women (last time you were all hot on the Victorian babes, what changed?) who were happy and contented with their lives. That does not have anything to do with my happiness in my life today. I was raised by a very traditional father to believe that I could lead my life and do what work I chose to do, just like my sisters and my brother were. Thank God for him!

[Zed]

Yeah! And the "Negroes" were all very jolly under slavery too! All that dancing and smiling! Back then, "they" had it good! Now, "they" are ashamed of what "they" are, and so they just try to act like white people!

 

Oh, yeah, P.S., read "Uncle Tom's Cabin," Pat Buchannen and Michele Bachman, David Duke, and Stormfront to find proof of how much happier "Negroes" were under slavery.

 

(Note to anybody: I am not comparing Blacks in slavery to women in America at any historical period. I am comparing the lameness of a bigoted, ignorant voice booming out to "tell it like it is" for and about the group of people who they're prejudiced against.)

 

P.S. I'm sure there were plenty of Puritan women (last time you were all hot on the Victorian babes, what changed?) who were happy and contented with their lives. That does not have anything to do with my happiness in my life today. I was raised by a very traditional father to believe that I could lead my life and do what work I chose to do, just like my sisters and my brother were. Thank God for him!

 

Indeed. I am quite glad I was born after Civil Rights. And his interpretation of how women lived in the 17th century based on one small sub-population is quite bizarre.

[Imajerk17]

I haven't read the entire thread yet. That said, the way attraction works--for both genders--"doesn't make sense" and is sometimes cruel.

 

If you are a guy and you don't project some dominance and intrigue, you will be blown off and/or "friend-zoned" a lot. Even if you have all these other things going for you. Also, you will come across women who have princess mentalities.

 

If you are a woman and you aren't pretty or you don't know how to flirt, men will pass you up. Even if you are Mother Theresa reincarnate. Also, you will come across guys who "just want one thing".

 

On top of that, the courtship process does put more effort on men than women. It is on us to read her signs and to take the appropriate initiative. It's the price we have to pay for not having to bear children (or at the very least, not having to carry around the extra equipment that women have to to be able to bear children).

 

Threads such as this get written all the time on here because people can't accept this. Whining about the above won't change a thing or help your dating life.

Edited September 29, 2012 by Imajerk17

[TheBigQuestion]

Using Thatcher as an example of women excelling in anything is laughable. No person than Thatcher is more responsible for the UK becoming an economically irrelevant, quasi-third world dump.

[loveunlimited]

In modern times.. women and men are no longer on the same team. Women used to support and encourage men, but now they are competing with them.

Gross generalisation. And if we're able to compete so successfully, either women are a damn sight more capable than men ever thought they were - or men are really just not as good as they thought they were.... You will find, however, than in many large-scale companies, it is still men who stubbornly occupy the driving seat and deliberately block women's' progress. I just wonder what it is they fear? Inevitably, the tide will turn. 'Pendulum swing like a pendulum do..." And it's headed our way, currently.

 

And because so many people refuse to open their eyes and instead choose to keep making lame excuses by pointing at the minority of "good people" as evidence that "everything is fine" doesn't help.

 

Its just like the crash of the economy in 2008. All the signs of a toxic unsustainable trend were there to see. But people ignored them and make retarded excuses. Then they lost their shirts.

 

People seem to have a hard time seeing emerging trends. They wait until the sh*t hits the fan to acknowledge a very obvious problem in the world.

What does this specifically have to do with the thread topic, exactly....?

[Mme. Chaucer]

So if women back then were very happy with their lives, why wouldn't women today be the same if they had the opportunity? Why do you arrogantly proclaim the modern way the 2 sexes relate is superior? You can live your life however you want, trust me it really doesn't matter to me, but you should also respect the rights of men and women who want to live in a natural society and work together.

 

I'm not the one who keeps invoking the Victorian and Puritan ladies, you are. And I'm sure some of them liked their lives just fine, while others were desperately unhappy. In any case, I have been able to lead a fulfilling life and have deep relationships with the men in my life in the current times, without having to dress as a pilgrim and set up stocks in my front yard.

 

The men I know aren't horrified by a woman doing various types of work or expanding out of a confined role. They LIKE it.

 

I do think it's weird and kind of narcissistic how you keep trying to convince everyone that women were so much better off, happier, etc., when they were relegated by society to a very tiny and cloistered life. I can't imagine coming on here and writing a pompous rant about how men would be better off conforming to some role I felt more comfortable with than the one they chose themselves.

 

I believe in moving forward and expanding, not restricting, confining and controlling.

 

I also am fine with other people living their lives as they choose. There are many Menonite families nearby here. I certainly don't feel that it would be my place to go tell the women to wear pants, eschew their hair nets and run for County Supervisor. I don't presume to think that they would be better off living the way that I do, either.

[Mme. Chaucer]

Gross generalisation. And if we're able to compete so successfully, either women are a damn sight more capable than men ever thought they were - or men are really just not as good as they thought they were....

 

The individual men who are very vocal and furious about women "competing" with them in the work force appear to be those who have counted upon a kind of entitlement being extended to them simply because they are male. Their gender was supposed to secure something for them that it did not. They're pissed off now.

[Woggle]

Women can make fine leaders just as well as men. Nothing really changes no matter who is in charge.

 

I don't condone hatred against any gender but the reason you see a lot of this rage is all you seem to see every week is End of Men kind of articles shoved down our throats during a recession that has hit men particularly hard. When times are hard people become angrier and when you have that kind of stuff shoved down your throat it is pretty much pouring gasoline on a fire. It is enough to make even the most enlightened man go MRA.

[Mme. Chaucer]

I don't condone hatred against any gender but the reason you see a lot of this rage is all you seem to see every week is End of Men kind of articles shoved down our throats during a recession that has hit men particularly hard.

 

Unless you spend any time on LoveShack, where you see thread after thread about the crap that is "modern woman."

 

We've already had the discussion about "The End of Men."

 

You know, talking, reading and writing books about sociologically pertinent subjects doesn't have to be threatening. Only if you let it.

[Woggle]

Unless you spend any time on LoveShack, where you see thread after thread about the crap that is "modern woman."

 

We've already had the discussion about "The End of Men."

 

You know, talking, reading and writing books about sociologically pertinent subjects doesn't have to be threatening. Only if you let it.

 

When a person names a book The End of Men what kind of reaction do they expect.

 

Half of these Loveshack posters are trolls and the guy you are arguing with is a Nazi which is hardly the mainstream view.

 

I am not blaming women for anything because most women don't participate in this men vs women stuff but the media pushes it and men who are already struggling in this economy seethe because it is being framed as a man vs woman issue when in reality women are struggling just as much as men. My neighbor just had 95% of her company which is mostly female outsourced to India and she has to train the person taking her job if she wants her severence.

 

Many stories like this exist but if you listen to the media they would have you believe that all men are struggling poor slobs and all women are Carrie Bradshaw and in tough times like this that is where much of the bitterness comes from.

 

I am not agreeing with them but just shedding some light and what is fueling it.

[Mme. Chaucer]

I am not scared about the title of a book. All the reviews I've read present it as a very interesting look at the quickly changing gender roles and specifically those of men. What's wrong with that? Should such topics be repressed because they might hurt some feelings?

 

Why is Carrie Bradshaw such a pariah?? I'm not a fan of such "chick lit" but why do you and your buddies always invoke the name of Carrie Bradshaw as an example of all that is unholy?

[Woggle]

I am using her as an example because the media would have you believe that all women are living her lifestyle while all men were a bunch of unemployed losers when reality is different.

 

Also a woman in New York who I used to bar tend for at a place she owns says all the time that the wannabe Carrie Bradshaws ruined the city so it is not just guys who say it. We still keep in touch and she wishes that show never existed and they would have stayed in flyover country.

 

Also of course you are not scared about it because it doesn't say that your gender is ending.