Board index › Coping in life › Love and Dating

Women and Masculinity

Page 4 of 6 [ 83 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

cavernio
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Aug 2012
Age: 41
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,462

30 Oct 2013, 10:06 am

Enh it's worse than you think shau, I'm a heterosexual woman...sorry I guess

*trying really hard to not sound ironic*
Happy Birthday!


_________________
Not autistic, I think
Prone to depression
Have celiac disease
Poor motivation


Last edited by cavernio on 30 Oct 2013, 10:10 am, edited 1 time in total.

Geekonychus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Nov 2012
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,660

30 Oct 2013, 10:10 am

What I find so funny about all these gender based generalizations is that they can all be flipped around and applied pretty much equally to both. Being shallow, judgemental, illogical and closeminded are human characteristics.



cavernio
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Aug 2012
Age: 41
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,462

30 Oct 2013, 10:11 am

Geekonychus wrote:
What I find so funny about all these gender based generalizations is that they can all be flipped around and applied pretty much equally to both. Being shallow, judgemental, illogical and closeminded are human characteristics.


I agree.


_________________
Not autistic, I think
Prone to depression
Have celiac disease
Poor motivation


octobertiger
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Sep 2013
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,949

30 Oct 2013, 10:28 am

The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
octobertiger wrote:
Ferrus91 wrote:
octobertiger wrote:
Western society is, in essence, a feminine thing, just by its nature. Trying to fit masculinity into it - even redefining the term so it's more socially acceptable - will leave most men with a choice between readjusting or staying outside of it, a lot of the time.

I don't think it is feminine so much as a sort of repressed masculinity.


What represses men? Western society has to be a factor, as it is female in nature - by generalisation, settled society has to be more feminine than masculine to survive, anyway. This is not ignoring areas of inequality or saying everything's great for women - far from it.

And who brings up boys in western society - women or men? It's usually the women. So, boys generally grow up being clueless about things to do with masculinity, and they won't exactly sit down and discuss things openly with their peers like many young women would do.

Generally women will pass important knowledge onto their daughters. Generally men will not pass knowledge onto their sons. Over time, this knowledge gets eroded, and men get 'wimpier', or have to take man lessons from people looking to line their pockets.

Hence an underlying dating problem - generally, western men complain about quantity of choice, and women complain about the quality of chocie. If you think about what is said above, and throw in media, high expectations, the effect of Disney cartoons...it's no surprise, really.

Repression can be a state of mind, too...


By saying the Western culture is "female", do you mean the 'opposite' culture, the Eastern, is "Male"?
Because whar you've described above applies exactly on Eastern culture as well.


No, I wasn't commenting. I don't know enough about Eastern culture - I've travelled a bit, but I couldn't make too much of a generalisation from it. And to be fair, I wouldn't dream of saying anything about the 'Middle East' from the basis of a handful of stops at Abu Dhabi International!

I have seen a lot of advertisement more man-focused, a bit more of a masculine culture, and generally different attitudes towards relationships than I have seen in England and parts of Europe. Also, the money=power and more 'traditional' thinking concerning the male and female roles in a relationship - something that the OP knows too well.

Once again, it's all a picture of society, not a generalisation of the individual, and the posts above substitute a microscope for a telescope.



Last edited by octobertiger on 30 Oct 2013, 10:36 am, edited 1 time in total.

FMX
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Mar 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,319

30 Oct 2013, 10:32 am

Solvejg wrote:
This comes back to the OP. Basically guys look past all that stuff and if they see a person they like, they will give them a shot whereas a girl will tend to go discuss her potential partner with her girlfriends and they will give their "opinions" then guys try to fit in with these "opinions" to get a date.


I don't understand how the guy finds out the girl's girlfriends' opinions. Does the girl actually tell him: "listen, my friends think you should do X... so do it"?

Solvejg wrote:
With all the guys i know, they look past their mate dating someone less attractive if they can cook/ are smart/ treat their mate nice/ are a nerd blah blah blah. but girls will nit pick all the little faults in a man and ultimately drive men to try to conform or be dateless.


I've heard males say this many times, so it's nice to hear it coming from a female. I think it's true. I resent the women who do this, but not as much as I resent the "men" who put up with it.

Where do women even learn this stuff? Do mothers seriously tell their daughters "now, when you grow up and get yourself a boyfriend, there'll be lots of stuff you have to fix, so start by ..."?

Solvejg wrote:
Some things i make very upfront from the start: i do not want to get married, i do not want to be exclusive and i am polyamorous, i do not want children but if my 99.9% contraception somehow fails, i am pro-life and as much as you will be pissed off i will be more upset. It i have a child it is mine and you can opt out and i have no expectations nor want to play happy families, i will be going into my career full force and you can support me or gtfo now, ect ect


Wow. All I can say is: I would love to see the man who can be up-front about such things and still get a girlfriend.

The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
No guy would make an issue if his gf didn't bring a gift from a business trip.


As long as she came over ready for sex, right? ;)

But on a serious note, I think your point is valid.


_________________
CloudFlare eating your posts? Try the Lazarus browser extension. See https://wp-fmx.github.io/WP/


Ferrus91
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 25 Apr 2013
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 311
Location: Kent, UK

30 Oct 2013, 11:42 am

FMX wrote:
Where do women even learn this stuff? Do mothers seriously tell their daughters "now, when you grow up and get yourself a boyfriend, there'll be lots of stuff you have to fix, so start by ..."?

I think a large majority of the population in general (in my experience) wants people to conform to some kind of norm and will use carrots or sticks to push people there. The reason women do it in relationships is because they can, because men are typically willing to tolerate it to get what they want.



yellowtamarin
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Sep 2010
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,763
Location: Australia

30 Oct 2013, 5:09 pm

Kjas wrote:
I don't p**** foot around either Sol. As soon as it happens I address it right here and hen. The thing is, usually the way I choose to address it would not be by fighting or nagging. I simply set the boundary and make it very clear in a non combative way.

Yes there will be boundary setting, and perhaps even a small misunderstanding or 2. But fights, no. Fights don't usually happen until one person tries to impose their will on the other in a combative way. That's why they can be so destructive and why people often hold grudges over them.

And it's not zero boo, we just deal with them in a different way so they never get to that point. And when they finally do, you know the other person well enough to be able to work through it successfully.

Stalk: no drama relationships are a good thing. With a temper like mine, things evatablity happen in my social life or at work. The relationship is a safe haven where I don't have to worry about more drama.

All of this, 100% agree. Except for the temper bit, as I don't get into fights with anyone, generally. But I certainly appreciate a no-drama relationship none-the-less!

Honestly if it ever gets to the "fighting" stage with me, there is something seriously wrong in the relationship (not just a "normal pitfall"). If it gets to that stage in the first few months, it means I'm dating someone who likes to pick fights, and they can go jump (luckily I've never gotten into a relationship with that sort of person).

FMX wrote:
Solvejg wrote:
Some things i make very upfront from the start: i do not want to get married, i do not want to be exclusive and i am polyamorous, i do not want children but if my 99.9% contraception somehow fails, i am pro-life and as much as you will be pissed off i will be more upset. It i have a child it is mine and you can opt out and i have no expectations nor want to play happy families, i will be going into my career full force and you can support me or gtfo now, ect ect


Wow. All I can say is: I would love to see the man who can be up-front about such things and still get a girlfriend.

Personally, I would appreciate this very much. Maybe not using terms like "or gtfo now", but being up-front about the things you know you want and don't want, bring it please. I enjoy having these sorts of discussion on the first or second date, and if their requirements match mine, brilliant!

If a man can't be up-front about his wants and still get a girlfriend, doesn't that just mean that his wants don't match those of the women he's dating? What's wrong with that? Isn't it better than finding out down the track, after you are both emotionally attached to one another?



FMX
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Mar 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,319

30 Oct 2013, 6:21 pm

yellowtamarin wrote:
FMX wrote:
Solvejg wrote:
Some things i make very upfront from the start: i do not want to get married, i do not want to be exclusive and i am polyamorous, i do not want children but if my 99.9% contraception somehow fails, i am pro-life and as much as you will be pissed off i will be more upset. It i have a child it is mine and you can opt out and i have no expectations nor want to play happy families, i will be going into my career full force and you can support me or gtfo now, ect ect


Wow. All I can say is: I would love to see the man who can be up-front about such things and still get a girlfriend.

Personally, I would appreciate this very much. Maybe not using terms like "or gtfo now", but being up-front about the things you know you want and don't want, bring it please. I enjoy having these sorts of discussion on the first or second date, and if their requirements match mine, brilliant!

If a man can't be up-front about his wants and still get a girlfriend, doesn't that just mean that his wants don't match those of the women he's dating? What's wrong with that? Isn't it better than finding out down the track, after you are both emotionally attached to one another?


Oh, nothing wrong with being up-front and discussing things, but the way Solveg's post came across is that she basically tells the man: "it's my way or the highway" (aka "or gtfo" ;)). The part that really amazed me was: "if I have a child it's mine and ... (I don't) want to play happy families". Perhaps I misread it, but my interpretation of that is that the child's father would have no rights whatsoever. That seems consistent with the context - polyamorous, my decision not to abort, my career, etc. I basically cannot believe that any man would agree to such terms, but since I remember Solveg posting about having a BF I can only infer that at least one man has. So instead I said that I cannot imagine a woman agreeing to such terms if the roles were reversed. Of course, it's possible that I totally misunderstood. I hope so.


_________________
CloudFlare eating your posts? Try the Lazarus browser extension. See https://wp-fmx.github.io/WP/


smudge
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Sep 2006
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,716
Location: Moved on

30 Oct 2013, 7:34 pm

cavernio wrote:
Solveg, you are driving me nuts!

Earlier in the thread you were generalizing women's behaviour and quite deliberately setting yourself as outside of being a woman, in a nutshell you claimed you're not a nit-picky gossip but that most women are, while most men aren't. Then most recently you complained about someone who was generalizing about how women raise kids, and suddenly you attach yourself to the subgroup of being a woman while you fight against generalizations about how mother's raise kids. (Which itself is also rather funny, because you're not even countering what octobertiger was saying but are presenting it as if you were.)


I've noticed some women saying stuff like this. Like it's a good thing to be more masculine and that they're somehow superior to other women because they don't nitpick or b***h like "other women". And they say they get along with men better, when it's often competition against other women in practise!


_________________
I've left WP.


yellowtamarin
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Sep 2010
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,763
Location: Australia

30 Oct 2013, 7:56 pm

FMX wrote:
yellowtamarin wrote:
FMX wrote:
Solvejg wrote:
Some things i make very upfront from the start: i do not want to get married, i do not want to be exclusive and i am polyamorous, i do not want children but if my 99.9% contraception somehow fails, i am pro-life and as much as you will be pissed off i will be more upset. It i have a child it is mine and you can opt out and i have no expectations nor want to play happy families, i will be going into my career full force and you can support me or gtfo now, ect ect


Wow. All I can say is: I would love to see the man who can be up-front about such things and still get a girlfriend.

Personally, I would appreciate this very much. Maybe not using terms like "or gtfo now", but being up-front about the things you know you want and don't want, bring it please. I enjoy having these sorts of discussion on the first or second date, and if their requirements match mine, brilliant!

If a man can't be up-front about his wants and still get a girlfriend, doesn't that just mean that his wants don't match those of the women he's dating? What's wrong with that? Isn't it better than finding out down the track, after you are both emotionally attached to one another?


Oh, nothing wrong with being up-front and discussing things, but the way Solveg's post came across is that she basically tells the man: "it's my way or the highway" (aka "or gtfo" ;)). The part that really amazed me was: "if I have a child it's mine and ... (I don't) want to play happy families". Perhaps I misread it, but my interpretation of that is that the child's father would have no rights whatsoever. That seems consistent with the context - polyamorous, my decision not to abort, my career, etc. I basically cannot believe that any man would agree to such terms, but since I remember Solveg posting about having a BF I can only infer that at least one man has. So instead I said that I cannot imagine a woman agreeing to such terms if the roles were reversed. Of course, it's possible that I totally misunderstood. I hope so.

I interpreted as Solvejg saying that she is keeping the baby ("it is mine" meaning you can't take it away from me), and he can choose whether he wants to stay or go, not that he has to go. Of course I may have misinterpreted also, but the way you have truncated her statements really changes the meaning.



Solvejg
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Mar 2011
Age: 38
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,558
Location: gondwana

30 Oct 2013, 8:28 pm

yellowtamarin wrote:
FMX wrote:
yellowtamarin wrote:
FMX wrote:
Solvejg wrote:
Some things i make very upfront from the start: i do not want to get married, i do not want to be exclusive and i am polyamorous, i do not want children but if my 99.9% contraception somehow fails, i am pro-life and as much as you will be pissed off i will be more upset. It i have a child it is mine and you can opt out and i have no expectations nor want to play happy families, i will be going into my career full force and you can support me or gtfo now, ect ect


Wow. All I can say is: I would love to see the man who can be up-front about such things and still get a girlfriend.

Personally, I would appreciate this very much. Maybe not using terms like "or gtfo now", but being up-front about the things you know you want and don't want, bring it please. I enjoy having these sorts of discussion on the first or second date, and if their requirements match mine, brilliant!

If a man can't be up-front about his wants and still get a girlfriend, doesn't that just mean that his wants don't match those of the women he's dating? What's wrong with that? Isn't it better than finding out down the track, after you are both emotionally attached to one another?


Oh, nothing wrong with being up-front and discussing things, but the way Solveg's post came across is that she basically tells the man: "it's my way or the highway" (aka "or gtfo" ;)). The part that really amazed me was: "if I have a child it's mine and ... (I don't) want to play happy families". Perhaps I misread it, but my interpretation of that is that the child's father would have no rights whatsoever. That seems consistent with the context - polyamorous, my decision not to abort, my career, etc. I basically cannot believe that any man would agree to such terms, but since I remember Solveg posting about having a BF I can only infer that at least one man has. So instead I said that I cannot imagine a woman agreeing to such terms if the roles were reversed. Of course, it's possible that I totally misunderstood. I hope so.

I interpreted as Solvejg saying that she is keeping the baby ("it is mine" meaning you can't take it away from me), and he can choose whether he wants to stay or go, not that he has to go. Of course I may have misinterpreted also, but the way you have truncated her statements really changes the meaning.


this is my meaning. i guess regional linguistic understanding comes into it. Really i have the choice to keep the baby if i fell pregnant. I have zero want or desire to settle down with the man just because i was pregnant. If he wants to be a part of the kids life, he can great, i am not forcing it and if he doesn't also great, he can walk away with no parental responsibilities.

if he doesn't agree to these terms on dating, then there is the door, go date someone who has the same belief structure. I will not ever date a person with the ideology that i can change them and mold them to what i want. i will gtfo straight away.


_________________
I love diggin' in the dirt
With just a pick and brush
Finding fossils is my aim
So I'm never in a rush


Solvejg
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Mar 2011
Age: 38
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,558
Location: gondwana

30 Oct 2013, 8:37 pm

smudge wrote:
cavernio wrote:
Solveg, you are driving me nuts!

Earlier in the thread you were generalizing women's behaviour and quite deliberately setting yourself as outside of being a woman, in a nutshell you claimed you're not a nit-picky gossip but that most women are, while most men aren't. Then most recently you complained about someone who was generalizing about how women raise kids, and suddenly you attach yourself to the subgroup of being a woman while you fight against generalizations about how mother's raise kids. (Which itself is also rather funny, because you're not even countering what octobertiger was saying but are presenting it as if you were.)


I've noticed some women saying stuff like this. Like it's a good thing to be more masculine and that they're somehow superior to other women because they don't nitpick or b***h like "other women". And they say they get along with men better, when it's often competition against other women in practise!


I do not nitpic people and never have and never will. I have also not given any information about my own interpersonal relationships in my own life. The way i observe the world is to stand back and I observe in a critical scientific manner and i am often very right on the observations i observe. I think the mistake that people are trying to do here is pidgenhole me into the NT/ High functioning aspie group of individual's on here when actually the opposite is true and i am highly disabled with my AUTISM!

I am quite open about the fact i do not have a penis and i have actually pushed multiple spawn out of my vagina. I do not attach myself to any demographic as i don't think there is one that would fit me. I can be described as "Use Solvejg's real name as a verb here".


_________________
I love diggin' in the dirt
With just a pick and brush
Finding fossils is my aim
So I'm never in a rush


Shau
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Oct 2009
Age: 164
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,270

30 Oct 2013, 9:52 pm

cavernio wrote:
Enh it's worse than you think shau, I'm a heterosexual woman...sorry I guess

*trying really hard to not sound ironic*
Happy Birthday!


Oh we're past our 26th birthday. The point is, I decided to make some pretty major changes to my personality starting age 26, and it wasn't until I made those changes that I got any attention from women at all.

And we're not talking about unambiguously positive changes (becoming more confident, better hygiene, gym, etc). We're talking about benign parts of my personality such as my odd sense of humor, unusual gestures, and stilted manner of speech.

Now that I've learned how to wear an "NT mask" very proficiently in order to appear "normal", I get far more attention from women. And yes, that includes all the dorky, geeky girls that never used to look at me that way either...most depressing of all.



Kjas
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Feb 2012
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,059
Location: the place I'm from doesn't exist anymore

30 Oct 2013, 10:31 pm

smudge wrote:
cavernio wrote:
Solveg, you are driving me nuts!

Earlier in the thread you were generalizing women's behaviour and quite deliberately setting yourself as outside of being a woman, in a nutshell you claimed you're not a nit-picky gossip but that most women are, while most men aren't. Then most recently you complained about someone who was generalizing about how women raise kids, and suddenly you attach yourself to the subgroup of being a woman while you fight against generalizations about how mother's raise kids. (Which itself is also rather funny, because you're not even countering what octobertiger was saying but are presenting it as if you were.)


I've noticed some women saying stuff like this. Like it's a good thing to be more masculine and that they're somehow superior to other women because they don't nitpick or b***h like "other women". And they say they get along with men better, when it's often competition against other women in practise!


There's internalized misogyny which is actually quite prevalent. But there is also emotional maturity - and I don't know about you smudge but I see a lot of bitching and gossiping among people of both sexes and genders. If you don't play into it, it's usually a sign of one or the other.


_________________
Diagnostic Tools and Resources for Women with AS: http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt211004.html


Kjas
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Feb 2012
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,059
Location: the place I'm from doesn't exist anymore

30 Oct 2013, 10:36 pm

smudge wrote:
cavernio wrote:
Solveg, you are driving me nuts!

Earlier in the thread you were generalizing women's behaviour and quite deliberately setting yourself as outside of being a woman, in a nutshell you claimed you're not a nit-picky gossip but that most women are, while most men aren't. Then most recently you complained about someone who was generalizing about how women raise kids, and suddenly you attach yourself to the subgroup of being a woman while you fight against generalizations about how mother's raise kids. (Which itself is also rather funny, because you're not even countering what octobertiger was saying but are presenting it as if you were.)


I've noticed some women saying stuff like this. Like it's a good thing to be more masculine and that they're somehow superior to other women because they don't nitpick or b***h like "other women". And they say they get along with men better, when it's often competition against other women in practise!


There's internalized misogyny which is actually quite prevalent. But there is also emotional maturity - and I don't know about you smudge but I see a lot of bitching and gossiping among people of both sexes and genders. If you don't play into it, it's usually a sign of one or the other.


_________________
Diagnostic Tools and Resources for Women with AS: http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt211004.html


FMX
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Mar 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,319

31 Oct 2013, 3:02 am

Solvejg wrote:
yellowtamarin wrote:
I interpreted as Solvejg saying that she is keeping the baby ("it is mine" meaning you can't take it away from me), and he can choose whether he wants to stay or go, not that he has to go. Of course I may have misinterpreted also, but the way you have truncated her statements really changes the meaning.


this is my meaning. i guess regional linguistic understanding comes into it. Really i have the choice to keep the baby if i fell pregnant. I have zero want or desire to settle down with the man just because i was pregnant. If he wants to be a part of the kids life, he can great, i am not forcing it and if he doesn't also great, he can walk away with no parental responsibilities.

if he doesn't agree to these terms on dating, then there is the door, go date someone who has the same belief structure.


I see, thanks for clarifying. That seems far more reasonable than my original interpretation (though I would still choose the "gtfo" option, personally).

Solvejg wrote:
I will not ever date a person with the ideology that i can change them and mold them to what i want. i will gtfo straight away.


That's a realistic approach that I wish would be the norm.


_________________
CloudFlare eating your posts? Try the Lazarus browser extension. See https://wp-fmx.github.io/WP/