[jupiters_release]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ayoob', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('jupiters_release', 'A')ll this existentialistic talk is embarrassing, keep the energy moving, doesn't have to be a martial art, pick up a basketball, join a volleyball team, marathon, whatever, there's countless ways to live physically well in our soon to be over civilization.
I do notice the senior and master black belts at my dojo are 'sensitive' but they have both the power and ability to kill the average person.
My grandmaster's motto is: Technique before strength, Spirit before technique.
"Brutal violence" has nothing to do with a healthy life, and most of the romanticizing is based on historical fiction. We don't need random violence, we need culture, trust.

[seldom_seen]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Gideon', 'B')reasts exist solely to attract men as a secondary sexual characteristic.

[rwwff]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Gideon', '1'). I hate when some ass who spent 4-6 years doing some ridiculous "research" thinks that they can walk around and be called "doctor". I except those in the hard sciences. I hate titles, to begin with, but the title of "doctor" for PhDs, Chiropractors, and so on is really over the top.

[ClassicSpiderman]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('smallpoxgirl', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Kylon', 'G')uys, don't feed the Neofeminist Troll.

[smallpoxgirl]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rwwff', 'A')s to SPG's vague reference, it could simply be she's female, has a Ph.D. in some biology/chemistry related field, works in medicine

[rwwff]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('smallpoxgirl', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rwwff', 'A')s to SPG's vague reference, it could simply be she's female, has a Ph.D. in some biology/chemistry related field, works in medicine

[Ayoob]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('smallpoxgirl', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rwwff', 'A')s to SPG's vague reference, it could simply be she's female, has a Ph.D. in some biology/chemistry related field, works in medicine

[holmes]

and the new one has double D's. Im transfixed!

[PenultimateManStanding]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('holmes', 'I') need someone to analyze why I like giving oral sex to woman?

[ECM]

Perhaps it would be better to replace violence with struggle.

Life has gotten far too easy for most westerners. We can just go down to the store and get about anything we need and tons of stuff we don't. If we become unemployed the governments and various organizations have support programs.

Remember the feeling when you accomplished something you worked at very hard? That is a great feeling. Remember the feeling of getting something with little effort? Not very fulfilling is it.

People used to struggle to provide the basics. This helped to make strong families and communities. As this struggle has decreased so have the bonds of families and communities.

I think most men enjoy the struggle and often times it is of a physical nature and violent.

The greatest struggle I see for most people now is how much of the Earth's resources they can waste.

The death of the "Alpha" male in western society is upon us. Unfortunately, it will probably lead us to being relegated to lesser powers in the future as the "Alpha" males of the rising societies take over.

The great societies of the past seem to follow the same pattern. Violence against others to dominate them and take their resources. Strengthening control over the newly conquered while attacking others. Decrease of aggression and violence with continuing strengthening of control. During this whole process the "conquerors" become more civilized, less aggressive, and ever more bloated by their gains. They then shift to more "Intellectual" pursuits while becoming even more bloated, passive, and dependent on the "conquered" to provide for basic needs. Then some of the "conquered" see a time when the "conquerors" are too weak to control them and begin the whole cycle of aggression and dominance again.

I would also like to note that in many past societies as the shift from aggressive to passive takes place the cohesion of the society begins to lessen. Struggle is often a common factor that unifies people. Without struggle the bonds weaken and break.

In nature the aggressive and violent dominate the passive. Humans are no different.

[threadbear]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Gideon', 'S')PG wrote:
". . . that women were harmed by being forced into the world of commodified work. I may be a lot of things, but I ain't a neofemenist."

Commodified work. Jeez. How many of those ostententatious "we must know something, just look at our words" words do you have in your bag?

By my definition you are a neofeminist.

If you need more than basic biology to explain why men like boobs, then you are, unequivocally, a neofeminist.

[threadbear]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ECM', 'P')erhaps it would be better to replace violence with struggle.

Life has gotten far too easy for most westerners. We can just go down to the store and get about anything we need and tons of stuff we don't. If we become unemployed the governments and various organizations have support programs.

Remember the feeling when you accomplished something you worked at very hard? That is a great feeling. Remember the feeling of getting something with little effort? Not very fulfilling is it.

People used to struggle to provide the basics. This helped to make strong families and communities. As this struggle has decreased so have the bonds of families and communities.

I think most men enjoy the struggle and often times it is of a physical nature and violent.

The greatest struggle I see for most people now is how much of the Earth's resources they can waste.

The death of the "Alpha" male in western society is upon us. Unfortunately, it will probably lead us to being relegated to lesser powers in the future as the "Alpha" males of the rising societies take over.

The great societies of the past seem to follow the same pattern. Violence against others to dominate them and take their resources. Strengthening control over the newly conquered while attacking others. Decrease of aggression and violence with continuing strengthening of control. During this whole process the "conquerors" become more civilized, less aggressive, and ever more bloated by their gains. They then shift to more "Intellectual" pursuits while becoming even more bloated, passive, and dependent on the "conquered" to provide for basic needs. Then some of the "conquered" see a time when the "conquerors" are too weak to control them and begin the whole cycle of aggression and dominance again.

I would also like to note that in many past societies as the shift from aggressive to passive takes place the cohesion of the society begins to lessen. Struggle is often a common factor that unifies people. Without struggle the bonds weaken and break.

In nature the aggressive and violent dominate the passive. Humans are no different.

[katkinkate]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', '.')....And what is a neo-feminist?

[ECM]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ECM', 'P')erhaps it would be better to replace violence with struggle.

Life has gotten far too easy for most westerners. We can just go down to the store and get about anything we need and tons of stuff we don't. If we become unemployed the governments and various organizations have support programs.

Remember the feeling when you accomplished something you worked at very hard? That is a great feeling. Remember the feeling of getting something with little effort? Not very fulfilling is it.

People used to struggle to provide the basics. This helped to make strong families and communities. As this struggle has decreased so have the bonds of families and communities.

I think most men enjoy the struggle and often times it is of a physical nature and violent.

The greatest struggle I see for most people now is how much of the Earth's resources they can waste.

The death of the "Alpha" male in western society is upon us. Unfortunately, it will probably lead us to being relegated to lesser powers in the future as the "Alpha" males of the rising societies take over.

The great societies of the past seem to follow the same pattern. Violence against others to dominate them and take their resources. Strengthening control over the newly conquered while attacking others. Decrease of aggression and violence with continuing strengthening of control. During this whole process the "conquerors" become more civilized, less aggressive, and ever more bloated by their gains. They then shift to more "Intellectual" pursuits while becoming even more bloated, passive, and dependent on the "conquered" to provide for basic needs. Then some of the "conquered" see a time when the "conquerors" are too weak to control them and begin the whole cycle of aggression and dominance again.

I would also like to note that in many past societies as the shift from aggressive to passive takes place the cohesion of the society begins to lessen. Struggle is often a common factor that unifies people. Without struggle the bonds weaken and break.

In nature the aggressive and violent dominate the passive. Humans are no different.

[threadbear]

"If anyone thinks that the submissive, sensitive Betas will ever become dominant they have little understanding of what it takes to control others and keep them focused. This is not saying that Beta types can't be the majority". -ECM

So you are describing the social struggle that takes place within a society. That is probably more fair, but I think your understanding may be limited. I would say from personal experience and objective studies of males with low testosterone that there is a basic misunderstanding of the beta male here.
The idea that alpha males are geared up for battle and not as sensitive is questionable.

Studies of the effect of testosteron on men, produced the surprising finding that it was men who lacked testosterone who were on edge, driven and defensive. Nothing about sensitivity and submission were noted in the study.

Men who had ample testosterone were much more laid back , less on edge, more open.

I would say that high levels of testosterone translate, very roughly, to higher levels of confidence, therefore less of a need to always be proving oneself. Alpha males would be able to communicate more effectively and guide those around them.

The idea that the beta male is necessarily sensitive and submissive is utter bunk, and what we might be seeing nowadays is a preliferation of betas in office management and THAT is the problem.

[threadbear]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Gideon', 'O')h Threadbare, please save the insults, really. I have no qualms about the extent or limitations of my vocabulary: I was shown and told many times in the wonderful public schools I attended the percentile in which I fell.

I criticize Small Pox Girl's choice of words not because they are drawn from a set of words that is unrecognized by the hoi polloi, but rather because the words she uses are made up words, insider words, shiboleth that are unnecessary other than to establish oneself as separate and above.

You see?

It's like attending a meeting and having some guy get up and start with, "our main prioritization strategy should be to leverage and advantacize our prinicple stratagems through cooptation of related . . . "

At that point I know the guy is a fraud and I stop listening.

Likewise, SPG uses lots of those "see my acumen?" words that are entirely unnecessary and that could easily be replaced with more definite words.

As an example, SPG suggested that I might have "gender insecurity" or some other such thing. I asked her to define her inside word so that I could assess myself. No answer yet.

So, thread bare, you wrote . . .

"The fault isn't with SPG's adequate vocabularly, but with the average, non- reading citizen's inability to ar-ti-cul-ate."

I disagree - extremely intelligent people have had no problem writing in clear, concise terms. I was just reading some Jefferson - even allowing for the differences in the language over 200 years, his points are all pretty clear and don't rely on garbage made up words.

You wrote:
"Women have to convince the opposite sex, through appearance alone, that they are able to reproduce, when their behaviour in the androgynous zone suggest otherwise."

What does this mean? Your position is that aggressive women at work places are presumed to be unable to reproduce?

This is bizarre and I don't get it.


"There is over-compensation involved here, working with the premise that men like women's breasts."

I don't know what this means either. What is the overcompensation? Fake boobs? Most aggressive women at work don't have fake boobs. In fact, most of the aggressive women I've met at work do their best to cover up their boobs, not show them.



"Men, by the same token, still have to appeal to women's desire to be protected (regardless of how the world has changed), by beefing up."

Men don't have to do anything. What does this mean?


"The hyper-muscling is compensation for the fact that little physical work is actually done and this male's role as supporter and protecter are likely limited."

This is pychobabble here. First, why not just say "weight lifting" or "bodybuilding"? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm?

Each term has been around for 40 years or more and each makes perfectly clear the activity being referenced. I'd suggest that bodybuilding implies a greater devotion, but that's splitting hairs.

Why can't it just be that some guys like to have a rock hard, ripped body? Why does it have to have a reason other than the following . . .

Men want women to want them.
Most women find a muscular male body more attractive than a Mr. Bean body.
Therefore many men lift weights (or, if you prefer, accilmate to a hypertrophied state of sarcomeric excess).


You see why I think your explanation is straining and psychobabble? I can explain it with three sentences using all well known words. You require a dissertation with a glossary.

It's almost as if modern sociologist/neofeminist types can't stand the thought that basic biology drives these obvious phenomena.

Women get bigger boobs so they can appeal to men and be more attractive to men.

THAT'S IT.

Oh, the horror the horror in the simplicity of it all! The horror that a neofeminist would have to face the truth that some women want big tits not because it was forced on them by society, not because culture has created a false attraction, and not for any other reason than (hush . . . )

that's the way our bio works and it's never gunnuh change. Egads!!!!!!



"My father made the comment that he finds what is considered the ideal modern feminine form kind of hideous."

Some guys like fat chicks. Some guys like hairy chicks. I find the ideal modern feminine form . . . well, rather ideal. To each their own and whatever floats your boat.


"And what is a neo-feminist?"


A feminist - A person who believes in equal rights for women. Gideon is a feminist.

A neofeminist - A person who believes that anything that is good for women is good, and who actively pursues this end. Gideon despises the theory of neofeminism.

Two examples - A feminist notes that the admission percent for women is 55% at the college level (45% for men) and notes that it appears that the practical limit of a gender level playing field has been reached or is close at hand.


A neofeminist notes that the number of CEOs in fortune 500 companies is less than 50%, and calls for government action to end the discrimination.

A feminist retorts that 50% might not be the natural, unbiased percent if a level playing field was, in fact, in place, and reiterates that the goal is equal rights, not equal performance in all endeavors in life. The feminist adds that the percentage of secretaries and nurses and elementary teachers are all dramatically skewed in favor of those with vaginas, and wonders whether the neofeminists have taken any actions to ameliorate those injustices.


And so on.

Neofeminists are equivalent to the Jesse Jacksons of the world, who aren't interested in what's right, per se, but rather in what's best for their group.

[threadbear]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Gideon', 'H')ey threadbare, I understood that last post. Finally, we connect!

I think I get your dilemma.

If you present too much of a feminine front, then you can't get your job done as well as possible. If you present the front that best gets the job done, then men don't get to see your feminine side, and that makes an intimate relationship more difficult to develop.

Is that about right?

I gotta say, my life at the big companies was anything but. It's a huge double standard, and I imagine that it must stink from your end of it.

But to be clear, I didn't create the double standard, and neither did sexism.

Like many things involving men and women, biology sets the double standard.

I would come to work each day and just be me. I'd blast people who needed blasting, be sympathetic and understanding when needed, and then turn around and ream a slacker, if need be.

The response? The slackers hated me, the bossses loved me, and the women wanted me to leave my wife and kids and have children with them.

That's no BS. Women at the Corp loved the Type A get things done mentality. The fact that I was the only guy on the floor who was a bodybuilder type didn't hurt. I'd be in a room full of mixed people and the guys next to me would be discussing what flavor tea they preferred. They'd ask me, and I'd spit something out like "I take it black, and preferably with some grounds still left in it."

Now we're all making the same money and we're all educated and who are the women folk going to go for?

The guy who thinks chamomile tea is a fine topic of conversation?

See Fight Club. I'm Tyler Durden. Most guys are his feminine alter ego.

The funny thing is, I was the other guy for most of my life. Then I went and got a grad degree and put on 50 pounds of muscle. Somewhere along that path I started to notice the change.

Most women like guys who are agressive, but not violent, muscular, but not steroidal, and intelligent - and preferably more than them. That's my experience, anyway.

I have yet to meet the woman who says, yeah, my ideal guy can't bench press the bar, weighs 10 pounds more than me, doesn't have the courage to return a product if it involves confrontation, and he's, uh, a bit slower than me.

On the other side, I can see how it would be murder to have to play neuter all day, be the heavy, chew people out, and so on.

What guy likes that?

[Atlantean_Relic]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', '
')
I went out with a man several years ago who would scream in a shrill falsetto when upset and cry at the drop of a hat. He was prickly, foppish and overly-sensitive. He also perspired heavily. At the time I thought he was precious. which has led me to ponder what kind of weirdo I was at the time. If you were to meet him, you'd want to punch him after about half an hour of conversation. This must be the type you're thinking of. True? He needed boot camp.

[Ayame]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', '
')I went out with a man several years ago who would scream in a shrill falsetto when upset and cry at the drop of a hat. He was prickly, foppish and overly-sensitive. He also perspired heavily. At the time I thought he was precious. which has led me to ponder what kind of weirdo I was at the time.

[smallpoxgirl]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Gideon', 'A') feminist - A person who believes in equal rights for women. Gideon is a feminist.