independent and unofficial
Prince fan community site
Prince fan community site
Create new topic 
Printable version (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)| Author | Message |
Male vs. Female, politically incorrect? I didn't want to clutter up the other thread with off topic questions, but some of the comments in the thread about war got me thinking.
"After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill...the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill...you stay in wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes." | |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
Wer ist dort? Unterbrechende Kuh. Unterbrech... Muh!!! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Nice picture gary... "After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill...the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill...you stay in wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes." | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I don't think they can be more different. But some of it, I wonder if it is society or if it is nature. for instance, the things I see a majority of women caring about like the way they maintain the way they look. God DAMN there are a lot of dumb motherfuckers walking around! - George Carlin
Stalkerwomen of the world unite in delusion!!!!!  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Vendetta1 said: I don't think they can be more different. But some of it, I wonder if it is society or if it is nature. for instance, the things I see a majority of women caring about like the way they maintain the way they look.
I'll be the first to admit to being a bit old fashioned but I thought that there were some behavioral tendencies that naturally occurred in men and women beyond societal conditioning. For instance, I remember watching some documentary a few years ago where they put a number of babies less than a year old in a room full of toys. Sure enough, most of the girls chose dolls and such while the baby boys were more drawn to the trucks and other mechanical things. Is that a bad thing now? "After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill...the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill...you stay in wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes." | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
babynoz said: Are these differences all due to societal conditioning or is there some chemical/biological basis as well?
there are differences... our decision making is quite different from men... and wait.. you're sexist now if you say women are more nurturing and protective?  .. I mean really, men and women DO HAVE different roles in life, whether people like that or not, and I think it's some people's insecurities that jump the gun crying 'sexism'. Women ARE SEEN as being the loving, nurturing types, what's wrong with that? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Flowers2 said: babynoz said: Are these differences all due to societal conditioning or is there some chemical/biological basis as well?
there are differences... our decision making is quite different from men... and wait.. you're sexist now if you say women are more nurturing and protective? .. I mean really, men and women DO HAVE different roles in life, whether people like that or not, and I think it's some people's insecurities that jump the gun crying 'sexism'. Women ARE SEEN as being the loving, nurturing types, what's wrong with that? That's what I'm getting at...apparently it's taboo to say such things nowadays. As you alluded to, men and women, generally speaking, tend to approach decision making differently. To me that doesn't mean one is better or worse than the other, only different. I'm interested to know why some people think that's wrong. "After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill...the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill...you stay in wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes." | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Flowers2 said: babynoz said: Are these differences all due to societal conditioning or is there some chemical/biological basis as well?
there are differences... our decision making is quite different from men... and wait.. you're sexist now if you say women are more nurturing and protective? .. I mean really, men and women DO HAVE different roles in life, whether people like that or not, and I think it's some people's insecurities that jump the gun crying 'sexism'. Women ARE SEEN as being the loving, nurturing types, what's wrong with that? God DAMN there are a lot of dumb motherfuckers walking around! - George Carlin
Stalkerwomen of the world unite in delusion!!!!! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
The reason I said that men were more prone to violence is because more serial killers are men. And plus, I've seen men act like complete jackasses over ego issues. And they've been in charge basically for so long....I don't know. Just my opinion. If you air your dirty linen in public, expect people to comment on the skid marks! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Vendetta1 said: Flowers2 said: there are differences... our decision making is quite different from men... and wait.. you're sexist now if you say women are more nurturing and protective? .. I mean really, men and women DO HAVE different roles in life, whether people like that or not, and I think it's some people's insecurities that jump the gun crying 'sexism'. Women ARE SEEN as being the loving, nurturing types, what's wrong with that? Bingo. Women have the ability to PRODUCE life. How dope is THAT? Hell. Men ain't shit.  nWo: bboy87 - Timmy84 - LittleBlueCorvette - MuthaFunka - phunkdaddy - Christopher
MuthaFunka - Black...by popular demand | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I found this article extremely interesting...it brings up some deep issues.
There seems to be a kind of statistical dyslexia that people get when
feminists start talking about male violence. The statement “Most violent crimes are committed by men” is often misheard as “most men are violent,” or even with a kind of gender dyslexia, as “women are never violent.” Thus radical feminists find themselves in conversations like this: “Most of the violence around the world is committed by men.” “You can’t say that! My friend Jim isn’t violent!” “Nevertheless, the Bureau of Justice statistics show that over 85% of violent crimes in the U.S are committed by men.” “Are you saying women are never violent? Because I read about this one woman who...” “I guess her crime would be one of the 15%…” “Some of us don’t think men are that bad, you know.” The conversation usually stops there, stuck in rounds of denial and accusation, while the defensive person accuses the radical feminist of man-hating, male-bashing, and unfairness, and of wanting to alienate half of the population. The conversation never goes on to examine what it is about men that causes the violence, what we could do to help men stop their violence, or anything else constructive. This reluctance to talk about men’s violence is widespread and seems to amount almost to a taboo. The news media report that “a woman was raped,” but never say “a man raped a woman.” Analyses of school violence talk about “kids killing kids,” ignoring the fact that it is almost exclusively boys committing the violence. Terms like “domestic violence” mask the fact that most of this violence is commtted by men. Feminists and feminist organizations also fall into this pattern by using the term “violence against women.” This wording puts the focus on women as victims and hides who is perpetrating the violence. If we can’t even say who is doing most of the violence in the world, how can we hope to stop it? Why do both men and women resist naming male violence? One reason is that we are afraid to insult, alienate, or anger male family members and loved ones—and men are often angered by discussions of male violence. Men are notoriously reluctant to accept responsibility or apologize for anything they do on an individual level. When it comes to taking responsibility on the society-wide level, we encounter this fragile male ego writ large. Of course not all men are like this. But the unapologetic male is a pervasive cultural theme that we are all aware of. And it is true enough, often enough, that on a case-by-case, experiential level both women and men know to avoid stirring up that male defensiveness. When feeling accused, a man may lash out by raising counter-accusations, confuse the issue, deny the wrong-doing, become sullen and withdrawn, or even, dare I say it, become violent (see box on page 24 for some common defenses against discussing male violence). Another reason men resist naming male violence is that men tend to think of the male as the default human. This means they can’t see male patterns as male—they just see them as human. So male researchers and theorists often write about “human” aggression, “humanity’s” wars, and so forth. But can we stop “human” violence without acknowledging and examining the fact that it is disproportionately committed by men? I think not. For example, doing research on violence in both men and women together, without looking at differences between the sexes, would result in skewed results in which women’s different reasons for committing violence and women’s decreased propensity for violence would mask the male data, decreasing the chance that meaningful, usable findings would result. We need to stop debating whether men are more violent or quibbling about whether women could be as violent as men if they had the chance, and take accurate stock of the evidence: United Nations Economic Commission for Europe data show that in the U.S. and Europe, 85%-100% of people convicted of assault are men. And 90% of murders are committed by men. Men are by far the principal perpetrators of rape, war, torture, incest, sexual abuse, sexualized murder, and genocide. We need to investigate what it is about men and masculinity that is so conducive of and associated with such a wide range of violent behavior. We need to talk about male violence. The sooner we stop denying that men are the ones who commit most violence and begin to examine what it is about men that causes this, the sooner we start to solve it. We need terminology that will break through the statistical dyslexia and the resistance surrounding the term “male violence” and allow us to focus on the problem. I think we’d have more success with a phrase that could not be misinterpreted as “all men always do it.” For example, most people can understand that “male-pattern baldness” is a male problem and that when women do have thinning hair the pattern and etiology are usually different. What if we start calling male violence “male-pattern violence” as distinguished from “female-pattern violence”? Male-Pattern Violence “Male-pattern violence,” then, is characterized most notably by its far greater overall prevalence than female-pattern violence. A far greater proportion of men commit male-pattern violence than women commit either male-pattern or female-pattern violence. Male-pattern violence also has a different etiology than female-pattern violence. Male-pattern violence is often characterized by motivations of aggression, revenge, competition for dominance, competition with other males (for example in drug- or gang-related violence), or feelings of ownership or entitlement toward women. Male-pattern violence includes sexual violence, including sexual violence against their own children. Some common patterns of male-pattern violence are assaulting/killing a woman who rejects them or tries to leave a relationship with them, killing children, wife, and self out of a tendency to see their wives and children as merely an extension of themselves, killing other males who are in economic competition with them, killing after being dishonored, killing for sexual gratification and killing in a jealous rage. Male-pattern violence ranges in scope from these individual crimes up to full-scale war and genocide. Female-pattern violence is more often characterized by self-defense, response to long-term abuse by a husband, killing children because she cannot properly care for them, and involvement in male-initiated and male-led violence ranging from crime to war (e.g., women in the military). I think the term male-pattern violence side-steps the whole “some men aren’t violent” thing because it is obvious it is talking about a pattern that most often occurs in men, but can also happen in women. It should also be clear that it doesn’t mean all men engage in male-pattern violence (any more than all men exhibit male-pattern baldness) but that when it occurs, it does result from some tendency related specifically to masculinity. So a woman who commits male-pattern violence is following a pattern that is found predominantly in men, but can happen in some women. Once we learn what causes male-pattern violence in men, we can see if those same causes are present in a violent woman—did she have a sense of entitlement, did she have a jealous rage, and so on. Some are already doing this work. The movie Tough Guise, produced by Jackson Katz, shows that if we can get beyond the denial, we can explore the aspects of masculinity as defined in families, in schools, and in popular culture that encourage and condone male-pattern violence. The book Men’s Work by Paul Kivel and the book Refusing to be a Man by John Stoltenberg also examine how masculinity is connected to violence. But for social change to take place, we need more than just a few books. We need a public information campaign. We all need to be talking about solutions to the problem every day. We need to talk to our male family members and colleagues in ways that point to the truth. We need to raise sons who don’t perpetuate the violence. We need our newspapers and other media to help focus the attention on the causes of violence, rather than the victims. These things are needed for social change, for men to change. Without open discourse about the truth of male-pattern violence, we have confusion. We see increases in women’s violence. And we see male violence continue and even escalate worldwide while societies seem to just accept it as inevitable. Until we can openly and honestly address the problem with those who are committing it, we are going to have male-pattern violence. Do We Really Want To End Violence? Why do both men and women avoid admitting the existence of and examining male violence? Could it be we don’t really want to end violence? Are we afraid, as a society, that if our men shy away from violence, we will be vulnerable to the violence of other men, other cultures? Do women find violent men attractive? Are men afraid that if they are asked to end their own violence, they will be vulnerable to the violence of other men? Are they afraid that without violence, they would lose their dominance over women? Is it that without recourse to violence, men would lose part of their identity? We may all have to examine our fears in order to reveal resistance to stopping violence. And we may need to examine the ways in which our economy, our nation, and our way of life are supported by violence before we can dismantle all the mechanisms that perpetuate violence in our lives, from our media’s glorification of violence, to our violent video-game industry, to our love of violent sports, to the institutionalized violence of our military. ONLY LOSERS FEAR A MORE LEVEL PLAYING FIELD~~Sananda Maitreya Beware of men that will not go down! (I wish my momma had taught me all this)-BklynBabe | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
babynoz said: Nice picture gary...
 Let me 'splain myself a little better.
In the other thread someone was accused of being "sexist" for suggesting that females tend to be more nurturing and protective. I thought it was curious to view that as a sexist remark. How are we defining reverse sexism? It's probably quite a good intention that would make someone object, but I do think people miss the point if they object to the idea that, in society, there tend to be different patterns of behaviour for men and women. I think that's largely to do with social conditioning and the different social roles men and women are socialised into playing, rather than something inherent in human biology, though. If things were part of 'human nature', they'd presumably be constant, but just look at the massively different gender roles that men or women have had at different times and places. I mean, in the days of Mozart (late 18th century), men were expected to wear make-up, wigs, frilly clothes, and flounce around the place preening themselves, and that would've seemed obvious to the people there! There are definitely natural abilities (e.g. giving birth), but I think we always hugely underestimate the importance of society in these things. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Vendetta1 said: Flowers2 said: there are differences... our decision making is quite different from men... and wait.. you're sexist now if you say women are more nurturing and protective? .. I mean really, men and women DO HAVE different roles in life, whether people like that or not, and I think it's some people's insecurities that jump the gun crying 'sexism'. Women ARE SEEN as being the loving, nurturing types, what's wrong with that? I believe women are more nurturing also.. we're more emotional than men.. our whole make up is different from men and is why we would make decisions different from men | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
MuthaFunka said: Vendetta1 said: I definitely think women are more nurturing. Babies come from us. There is a bond that men just cannot have.
Bingo. Women have the ability to PRODUCE life. How dope is THAT? Hell. Men ain't shit. we need you men too to produce life.. and I think men can be more rational and laid back sometimes than women in decision making... you guys aren't emotional like us, you guys will think about stuff before moving (whereas us women, we'll act sometimes on emotion) and sometimes you'll see the picture clearer.. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Flowers2 said: MuthaFunka said: Bingo. Women have the ability to PRODUCE life. How dope is THAT? Hell. Men ain't shit. we need you men too to produce life.. and I think men can be more rational and laid back sometimes than women in decision making... you guys aren't emotional like us, you guys will think about stuff before moving (whereas us women, we'll act sometimes on emotion) and sometimes you'll see the picture clearer.. Sheeeit, y'all don't need us anymore to produce life! Y'all been doin' it WITHOUT us now! Hell, pretty soon there are gonna be "Sperm Stations" - Gas stations with sperm instead of gas! Y'all just crouch down and "get some"! Fill HER up?!  nWo: bboy87 - Timmy84 - LittleBlueCorvette - MuthaFunka - phunkdaddy - Christopher
MuthaFunka - Black...by popular demand | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
MuthaFunka said: Flowers2 said: we need you men too to produce life.. and I think men can be more rational and laid back sometimes than women in decision making... you guys aren't emotional like us, you guys will think about stuff before moving (whereas us women, we'll act sometimes on emotion) and sometimes you'll see the picture clearer.. Sheeeit, y'all don't need us anymore to produce life! Y'all been doin' it WITHOUT us now! Hell, pretty soon there are gonna be "Sperm Stations" - Gas stations with sperm instead of gas! Y'all just crouch down and "get some"! Fill HER up?! lol | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
http://www.environmentalg...uction/750
"...I will go to the animal shelter and get you a kitty cat. I will let you fall in love...with that kitty cat. And then on some dark, cold night I will steal away into your home...and punch you in the face!" |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
lazycrockett said: Ok, so it may be overstating it a bit to say that males will be irrelevant. Just because we’re not technically needed to breed doesn’t mean women will no longer find men attractive, right? After all, we’re good for a lot more than just baby making. We’ve got tons to offer! For instance, just the other day I assembled a chair from Ikea, and it only wobbles a tiny bit when you sit on it. Also, I’m frequently asked to kill insects. I think we men have a bright future.
Yes, but in my case I'm struggling after chair assembly and fly-swatting. Oh, and I am m allowed to cross over from my side of the bed for novelty value every once in a while. ALT+PLS+RTN: Pure as a pane of ice. It's a gift. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Flowers2 said: MuthaFunka said: Bingo. Women have the ability to PRODUCE life. How dope is THAT? Hell. Men ain't shit. we need you men too to produce life.. and I think men can be more rational and laid back sometimes than women in decision making... you guys aren't emotional like us, you guys will think about stuff before moving (whereas us women, we'll act sometimes on emotion) and sometimes you'll see the picture clearer.. Dear God, woman! Have you met us?? Rational and laid back? Why the mere inability to find a pair of socks can send us reeling into crisis! And having to ask for directions sends our fragile egos shriveling up into a tiny ball like a perturbed hedgehog! It's only the presence of women, on hand to take care of these constant crises (in addition to their own business and the responsibility for seeing that any kids on the scene are fed, cared for, etc) that prevents us from lashing out wildly at each other, before retreating into a corner to rock back and forth in a fit of confusion and self-pity!  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
deebee said: Flowers2 said: we need you men too to produce life.. and I think men can be more rational and laid back sometimes than women in decision making... you guys aren't emotional like us, you guys will think about stuff before moving (whereas us women, we'll act sometimes on emotion) and sometimes you'll see the picture clearer.. Dear God, woman! Have you met us?? Rational and laid back? Why the mere inability to find a pair of socks can send us reeling into crisis! And having to ask for directions sends our fragile egos shriveling up into a tiny ball like a perturbed hedgehog! It's only the presence of women, on hand to take care of these constant crises (in addition to their own business and the responsibility for seeing that any kids on the scene are fed, cared for, etc) that prevents us from lashing out wildly at each other, before retreating into a corner to rock back and forth in a fit of confusion and self-pity! Preach that shit! As a "GROUP" - Men are dumb! We're like sheep! We follow the pack even when we KNOW an arrest is inevitable! nWo: bboy87 - Timmy84 - LittleBlueCorvette - MuthaFunka - phunkdaddy - Christopher
MuthaFunka - Black...by popular demand | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
langebleu said: lazycrockett said: Ok, so it may be overstating it a bit to say that males will be irrelevant. Just because we’re not technically needed to breed doesn’t mean women will no longer find men attractive, right? After all, we’re good for a lot more than just baby making. We’ve got tons to offer! For instance, just the other day I assembled a chair from Ikea, and it only wobbles a tiny bit when you sit on it. Also, I’m frequently asked to kill insects. I think we men have a bright future.
Yes, but in my case I'm struggling after chair assembly and fly-swatting. Oh, and I am m allowed to cross over from my side of the bed for novelty value every once in a while. Oh Lawd, LMFAO! "After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill...the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill...you stay in wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes." | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
noimageatall said: I found this article extremely interesting...it brings up some deep issues.
http://www.offourbacks.org/malepat.htm There seems to be a kind of statistical dyslexia that people get when
feminists start talking about male violence. The statement “Most violent crimes are committed by men” is often misheard as “most men are violent,” or even with a kind of gender dyslexia, as “women are never violent.” Thus radical feminists find themselves in conversations like this: “Most of the violence around the world is committed by men.” “You can’t say that! My friend Jim isn’t violent!” “Nevertheless, the Bureau of Justice statistics show that over 85% of violent crimes in the U.S are committed by men.” “Are you saying women are never violent? Because I read about this one woman who...” “I guess her crime would be one of the 15%…” “Some of us don’t think men are that bad, you know.” The conversation usually stops there, stuck in rounds of denial and accusation, while the defensive person accuses the radical feminist of man-hating, male-bashing, and unfairness, and of wanting to alienate half of the population. The conversation never goes on to examine what it is about men that causes the violence, what we could do to help men stop their violence, or anything else constructive. This reluctance to talk about men’s violence is widespread and seems to amount almost to a taboo. The news media report that “a woman was raped,” but never say “a man raped a woman.” Analyses of school violence talk about “kids killing kids,” ignoring the fact that it is almost exclusively boys committing the violence. Terms like “domestic violence” mask the fact that most of this violence is commtted by men. Feminists and feminist organizations also fall into this pattern by using the term “violence against women.” This wording puts the focus on women as victims and hides who is perpetrating the violence. If we can’t even say who is doing most of the violence in the world, how can we hope to stop it? Why do both men and women resist naming male violence? One reason is that we are afraid to insult, alienate, or anger male family members and loved ones—and men are often angered by discussions of male violence. Men are notoriously reluctant to accept responsibility or apologize for anything they do on an individual level. When it comes to taking responsibility on the society-wide level, we encounter this fragile male ego writ large. Of course not all men are like this. But the unapologetic male is a pervasive cultural theme that we are all aware of. And it is true enough, often enough, that on a case-by-case, experiential level both women and men know to avoid stirring up that male defensiveness. When feeling accused, a man may lash out by raising counter-accusations, confuse the issue, deny the wrong-doing, become sullen and withdrawn, or even, dare I say it, become violent (see box on page 24 for some common defenses against discussing male violence). Another reason men resist naming male violence is that men tend to think of the male as the default human. This means they can’t see male patterns as male—they just see them as human. So male researchers and theorists often write about “human” aggression, “humanity’s” wars, and so forth. But can we stop “human” violence without acknowledging and examining the fact that it is disproportionately committed by men? I think not. For example, doing research on violence in both men and women together, without looking at differences between the sexes, would result in skewed results in which women’s different reasons for committing violence and women’s decreased propensity for violence would mask the male data, decreasing the chance that meaningful, usable findings would result. We need to stop debating whether men are more violent or quibbling about whether women could be as violent as men if they had the chance, and take accurate stock of the evidence: United Nations Economic Commission for Europe data show that in the U.S. and Europe, 85%-100% of people convicted of assault are men. And 90% of murders are committed by men. Men are by far the principal perpetrators of rape, war, torture, incest, sexual abuse, sexualized murder, and genocide. We need to investigate what it is about men and masculinity that is so conducive of and associated with such a wide range of violent behavior. We need to talk about male violence. The sooner we stop denying that men are the ones who commit most violence and begin to examine what it is about men that causes this, the sooner we start to solve it. We need terminology that will break through the statistical dyslexia and the resistance surrounding the term “male violence” and allow us to focus on the problem. I think we’d have more success with a phrase that could not be misinterpreted as “all men always do it.” For example, most people can understand that “male-pattern baldness” is a male problem and that when women do have thinning hair the pattern and etiology are usually different. What if we start calling male violence “male-pattern violence” as distinguished from “female-pattern violence”? Male-Pattern Violence “Male-pattern violence,” then, is characterized most notably by its far greater overall prevalence than female-pattern violence. A far greater proportion of men commit male-pattern violence than women commit either male-pattern or female-pattern violence. Male-pattern violence also has a different etiology than female-pattern violence. Male-pattern violence is often characterized by motivations of aggression, revenge, competition for dominance, competition with other males (for example in drug- or gang-related violence), or feelings of ownership or entitlement toward women. Male-pattern violence includes sexual violence, including sexual violence against their own children. Some common patterns of male-pattern violence are assaulting/killing a woman who rejects them or tries to leave a relationship with them, killing children, wife, and self out of a tendency to see their wives and children as merely an extension of themselves, killing other males who are in economic competition with them, killing after being dishonored, killing for sexual gratification and killing in a jealous rage. Male-pattern violence ranges in scope from these individual crimes up to full-scale war and genocide. Female-pattern violence is more often characterized by self-defense, response to long-term abuse by a husband, killing children because she cannot properly care for them, and involvement in male-initiated and male-led violence ranging from crime to war (e.g., women in the military). I think the term male-pattern violence side-steps the whole “some men aren’t violent” thing because it is obvious it is talking about a pattern that most often occurs in men, but can also happen in women. It should also be clear that it doesn’t mean all men engage in male-pattern violence (any more than all men exhibit male-pattern baldness) but that when it occurs, it does result from some tendency related specifically to masculinity. So a woman who commits male-pattern violence is following a pattern that is found predominantly in men, but can happen in some women. Once we learn what causes male-pattern violence in men, we can see if those same causes are present in a violent woman—did she have a sense of entitlement, did she have a jealous rage, and so on. Some are already doing this work. The movie Tough Guise, produced by Jackson Katz, shows that if we can get beyond the denial, we can explore the aspects of masculinity as defined in families, in schools, and in popular culture that encourage and condone male-pattern violence. The book Men’s Work by Paul Kivel and the book Refusing to be a Man by John Stoltenberg also examine how masculinity is connected to violence. But for social change to take place, we need more than just a few books. We need a public information campaign. We all need to be talking about solutions to the problem every day. We need to talk to our male family members and colleagues in ways that point to the truth. We need to raise sons who don’t perpetuate the violence. We need our newspapers and other media to help focus the attention on the causes of violence, rather than the victims. These things are needed for social change, for men to change. Without open discourse about the truth of male-pattern violence, we have confusion. We see increases in women’s violence. And we see male violence continue and even escalate worldwide while societies seem to just accept it as inevitable. Until we can openly and honestly address the problem with those who are committing it, we are going to have male-pattern violence. Do We Really Want To End Violence? Why do both men and women avoid admitting the existence of and examining male violence? Could it be we don’t really want to end violence? Are we afraid, as a society, that if our men shy away from violence, we will be vulnerable to the violence of other men, other cultures? Do women find violent men attractive? Are men afraid that if they are asked to end their own violence, they will be vulnerable to the violence of other men? Are they afraid that without violence, they would lose their dominance over women? Is it that without recourse to violence, men would lose part of their identity? We may all have to examine our fears in order to reveal resistance to stopping violence. And we may need to examine the ways in which our economy, our nation, and our way of life are supported by violence before we can dismantle all the mechanisms that perpetuate violence in our lives, from our media’s glorification of violence, to our violent video-game industry, to our love of violent sports, to the institutionalized violence of our military. Thanks for the input...very interesting. As for the last question, does the idea that men naturally tend to be more agressive necessarily have to lead to all out violence? Furthermore, do we want a world full of completely docile men??? Hmmm...what's the middle ground here? "After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill...the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill...you stay in wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes." | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
MuthaFunka said: Flowers2 said: we need you men too to produce life.. and I think men can be more rational and laid back sometimes than women in decision making... you guys aren't emotional like us, you guys will think about stuff before moving (whereas us women, we'll act sometimes on emotion) and sometimes you'll see the picture clearer.. Sheeeit, y'all don't need us anymore to produce life! Y'all been doin' it WITHOUT us now! Hell, pretty soon there are gonna be "Sperm Stations" - Gas stations with sperm instead of gas! Y'all just crouch down and "get some"! Fill HER up?! 
You's a Fool! "After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill...the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill...you stay in wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes." | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
babynoz said: MuthaFunka said: Sheeeit, y'all don't need us anymore to produce life! Y'all been doin' it WITHOUT us now! Hell, pretty soon there are gonna be "Sperm Stations" - Gas stations with sperm instead of gas! Y'all just crouch down and "get some"! Fill HER up?!
You's a Fool! nWo: bboy87 - Timmy84 - LittleBlueCorvette - MuthaFunka - phunkdaddy - Christopher
MuthaFunka - Black...by popular demand | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
babynoz said: I didn't want to clutter up the other thread with off topic questions, but some of the comments in the thread about war got me thinking.
Is it now politically incorrect to acknowledge or believe that men and women are behaviorally different in some ways? Are these differences all due to societal conditioning or is there some chemical/biological basis as well? For example, males are generally thought to be more prone to violence than females...how do statistics bear out this belief??? Discuss... Where are the statistics? But No, it is not politically incorrect because men and women are behaviorally different due to biology, chemistry and social conditioning. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Vendetta1 said: Flowers2 said: there are differences... our decision making is quite different from men... and wait.. you're sexist now if you say women are more nurturing and protective? .. I mean really, men and women DO HAVE different roles in life, whether people like that or not, and I think it's some people's insecurities that jump the gun crying 'sexism'. Women ARE SEEN as being the loving, nurturing types, what's wrong with that? No, we're just the check. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
babynoz said: Flowers2 said: there are differences... our decision making is quite different from men... and wait.. you're sexist now if you say women are more nurturing and protective? .. I mean really, men and women DO HAVE different roles in life, whether people like that or not, and I think it's some people's insecurities that jump the gun crying 'sexism'. Women ARE SEEN as being the loving, nurturing types, what's wrong with that? That's what I'm getting at...apparently it's taboo to say such things nowadays. As you alluded to, men and women, generally speaking, tend to approach decision making differently. To me that doesn't mean one is better or worse than the other, only different. I'm interested to know why some people think that's wrong. The only problem I see is generalizing so that it excludes or demasculinizes a man to say that he if being or acting female because he demonstrates nurturing, caring, child-rearing, or household skills. If you assign it specifically and solely, wholly to women, then no man should be allowed to raise children under any condition. Unless a woman is present. Reality shows that not to be the case, men are very capable of raising children as single parents, just as women are. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
MuthaFunka said: deebee said: Dear God, woman! Have you met us?? Rational and laid back? Why the mere inability to find a pair of socks can send us reeling into crisis! And having to ask for directions sends our fragile egos shriveling up into a tiny ball like a perturbed hedgehog! It's only the presence of women, on hand to take care of these constant crises (in addition to their own business and the responsibility for seeing that any kids on the scene are fed, cared for, etc) that prevents us from lashing out wildly at each other, before retreating into a corner to rock back and forth in a fit of confusion and self-pity! Preach that shit! As a "GROUP" - Men are dumb! We're like sheep! We follow the pack even when we KNOW an arrest is inevitable! I so beg to differ . . . Men are the greatest thing this planet has seen since the Sixth Day of Creation. Hunters, creators, builders, conquerors, miners, sailors, traders, explorers . . .. tend to be men. Men climb Everest, fight wars, dig for diamonds, gold, and everything else to impress . . . It was a man who built the Taj Mahal for the wife he lost in childbirth. . . | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
SUPRMAN said: MuthaFunka said: Preach that shit! As a "GROUP" - Men are dumb! We're like sheep! We follow the pack even when we KNOW an arrest is inevitable! I so beg to differ . . . Men are the greatest thing this planet has seen since the Sixth Day of Creation. Hunters, creators, builders, conquerors, miners, sailors, traders, explorers . . .. tend to be men. Men climb Everest, fight wars, dig for diamonds, gold, and everything else to impress . . . It was a man who built the Taj Mahal for the wife he lost in childbirth. . . Uh...yeah...Get some rest, yo - the joke missed you by about 17 hours .nWo: bboy87 - Timmy84 - LittleBlueCorvette - MuthaFunka - phunkdaddy - Christopher
MuthaFunka - Black...by popular demand | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
SUPRMAN said: Vendetta1 said: I definitely think women are more nurturing. Babies come from us. There is a bond that men just cannot have.
No, we're just the check. God DAMN there are a lot of dumb motherfuckers walking around! - George Carlin
Stalkerwomen of the world unite in delusion!!!!! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Create new topic Printable version (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
