• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

What Do Men Think It Means To Be A Man?

 
 
 
Tom Sawyer said:
That's not a result of immaturity or whatever, but an assessment that the average man isn't in a lot of physical danger from the average woman. If he wants her to stop hitting him ... he can just stop her from hitting him or wait for her to stop on her own without getting much of any injury before that happens. Third party intervention isn't required. Additionally, there's the assessment that he's a man and therefore it's fairly insulting to him to get in the middle of things and imply that he was unable to deal with it himself.
Click to expand...

As soon as he raises his hand to stop her from hitting him, pushes her strike aside, or subdues her from continuing to batter him, he will be seen immediately as the aggressor. Then other men may feel obliged to do something about that "aggression". He will be arrested for assault far far more quickly than she will, even when he was defending himself. And to not care or not help him because of social norms that it undercuts his manhood is a serious flaw in our society. Would you at least scorn the woman verbally? Give her a dirty look for her assault?
 
Jarhyn said:
Jolly_Penguin, if I may solicit a thoughtful and perhaps more-intimate-than-is-normal tone in this place: has this discussion at all impacted you or forced you to think more deeply about what obligations cultural access, and access to (being an authority within a cultural context) implies to those with an opportunity to speak out? Has it shaped your views on feminism in a way you deem "softening" to the notion that men should speak out when they hear men abusing women, (even if only because men are generally the only ones present?) or even promoted reinvestigation into such concepts? How has this whole debaucle of discussion impacted your views? Has it generated a moment of self-reflection as to what obligations you may have going forward, with respect to or even agnostic to your gender?
Click to expand...

You ask this in an honest and forthright way, so I will respond with a simple and honest no. It really hasn't. I already speak out when I see violence by anyone against anyone, male or female against male or female. All this thread so far has again shown me is the double standard of it being acceptable behaviour for women to lash out at men and make empty accusations against men, and men returning it towards women being declared sexist.

I wish I could say that a thread like this caused me to think deeply, and some here do, but this one has not.

I don't judge anyone by their gender, and I try to treat everyone equally. I actually would prefer it if on forums like this we all kept our genders secret, and didn't involve ourselves or our own stories into them. I have been guilty of this as much as others here, and I think I was wrong in doing so.
 
Jolly_Penguin said:
Koyaanisqatsi said:
It's like watching an old English man righteously justifying beastiality while fucking a dog.
Click to expand...

Well, at least you are self-aware. Good for you.
Click to expand...

I'm a young American man, and I'm not going to begrudge some folks for engaging in some inter-species erotica, so long as neither party is being hurt or objecting. I reminds me of the time I was living in Madison and we were babysitting a dog who happened to be on her heat. The body language was, well, unmistakably propositional. I passed on the opportunity, and she started spotting the day after, but since then, will vehemently reject notions that animals cannot or would not consent to such activity. Yes. I just admitted to being molested and sexually harassed by a dog.
 
Jarhyn said:
Jolly_Penguin said:
Koyaanisqatsi said:
It's like watching an old English man righteously justifying beastiality while fucking a dog.
Click to expand...

Well, at least you are self-aware. Good for you.
Click to expand...

I'm a young American man, and I'm not going to begrudge some folks for engaging in some inter-species erotica, so long as neither party is being hurt or objecting. I reminds me of the time I was living in Madison and we were babysitting a dog who happened to be on her heat. The body language was, well, unmistakably propositional. I passed on the opportunity, and she started spotting the day after, but since then, will vehemently reject notions that animals cannot or would not consent to such activity. Yes. I just admitted to being molested and sexually harassed by a dog.
Click to expand...

I'm not judging Koy for beastiality. I'm just happy that Koy isn't in denial about it. It is good to see such honesty with oneself.
 
Koyaanisqatsi said:
You missed it.

Your attempts at needling people are amusing, but not useful.
Click to expand...

Like hijacking a thread. But now you must tell us what is your operating principle for what is or is not “useful” and whatabout things that can be “useful” as opposed to things that ought to be “useful.”
Click to expand...

Actually, no. By your own standards enunciated in this very thread, I need not answer a goddamned question of yours. See how that works?

Koyaanisqatsi said:
And do you speak for all people when you condemn something as “amusing” not somehow being “useful”?
Click to expand...

Of course not. Where did you get that from? Would you kindly quote the post where I said I spoke for all? This is a discussion board. I am offering an opinion.

I didn't realize that you were incapable of inferring that, so for future reference, unless I state that something is a fact, you may safely regard it as an offered opinion, solely speaking from my own point of view. Are we clear on this now?

Koyaanisqatsi said:
To be amused is to feel satisfied—like one is in on the joke (in spite of not actually being in on the joke)—and this in turn can be found “useful” by some, so your blanket condemnation of the use of amusement is not appropriate to the topic of what it means to be a Muslim, so tell us, why won’t you condemn humor among terrorists? That’s despicable that you find terrorism amusing.
Click to expand...

It's neat when I find someone talented enough to combine a strawman and a red herring in one thought. You're very talented.

That's only my opinion, though. I'm sure others disagree.

By the way, amusing doesn't mean what you state it means. If you wish to converse, please use the language accurately. It has nothing to do with "satisfaction" or "being in on the joke", which means that your entire "point" here (and I use that term loosely) is based on a flawed premise.

Koyaanisqatsi said:
Oh, I’m sorry. Was that not the topic of this thread? Because if you find one thing amusing, you must find ALL things amusing to be logically consistent...so...why are you laughing at the victims of terrorists?
Click to expand...

I'm actually laughing at you and your flailing. You don't even seem to understand what amusement even is, and then on top of that you attempt to apply logic to a human emotion. You may as well try to fly to the Moon on a cheeseburger.

Please make your next post to me less a silly Gish-Gallop of non-points, no?
 
Koyaanisqatsi said:
Thumpalumpacus said:
By your own standards enunciated in this very thread, I need not answer a goddamned question of yours. See how that works?
Click to expand...

Yeah, do you? Because that was the point.
Click to expand...

You will notice that I have not once asked an answer of Toni once she demurred. I saw this point long before you mentioned it. The difference between you and I is that I am not big on being a preachy twat going off on people who aren't even doing what I'm yelling about.

Your mileage obviously varies.

Koyaanisqatsi said:
You don’t even know what amusement even is
Click to expand...
Missed it again.
Click to expand...

mmhmm ... you keep telling yourself that.
 
Jolly_Penguin said:
Tom Sawyer said:
That's not a result of immaturity or whatever, but an assessment that the average man isn't in a lot of physical danger from the average woman. If he wants her to stop hitting him ... he can just stop her from hitting him or wait for her to stop on her own without getting much of any injury before that happens. Third party intervention isn't required. Additionally, there's the assessment that he's a man and therefore it's fairly insulting to him to get in the middle of things and imply that he was unable to deal with it himself.
Click to expand...

As soon as he raises his hand to stop her from hitting him, pushes her strike aside, or subdues her from continuing to batter him, he will be seen immediately as the aggressor. Then other men may feel obliged to do something about that "aggression". He will be arrested for assault far far more quickly than she will, even when he was defending himself. And to not care or not help him because of social norms that it undercuts his manhood is a serious flaw in our society. Would you at least scorn the woman verbally? Give her a dirty look for her assault?
Click to expand...

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GccCWo_eZdw[/youtube]

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEZH6YSQvwA[/youtube]

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pL0JqWYr0E[/youtube]

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlHVANXh-yg[/youtube]

And just for fun, here's one about sexual harassment in public. A whole different part of your brain activates when you reverse the genders, doesn't it? Though I am curious how different the female on male one would be if she was unattractive.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDCZhkvxHc0 [/youtube]
 
Last edited:
Jolly_Penguin said:
Toni said:
You should read to the end: https://www.washingtonpost.com/outl...od-men-its-not-enough/?utm_term=.4e7b125f3237
Click to expand...

A whole lot of pent up hatred in that article. Men bad. Women good. Listen to women. Shout at men. Men responsible for other men. Got it. Now go ahead and womansplain how I don't understand.
Click to expand...

Well, that's the explicitly stated entire point of the article. Women have this lifetime of pent up anger and hatred and it's becoming far more socially acceptable for them to express this and demand better treatment. Men listening to them isn't the answer, it's changing what's acceptable behavior that's the answer.
 
I can't read the article at the Washington Post (paywall) but if it's this:

"In the centuries of feminist movements that have washed up and away, good men have not once organized their own mass movement to change themselves and their sons or to attack the mean-spirited, teasing, punching thing that passes for male culture. Not once. Bastards. Don’t listen to me. Listen to each other. Talk to each other. Earn your power for once.

The gender war that has broken out in this country is flooding all our houses. It’s rising on the torrent of memories that every woman has."

http://www.unz.com/isteve/washingto...aping-us-all-you-good-men-but-its-not-enough/

Then, eek. That is more than a bit ott, in my opinion. I'm not sure how much good is achieved by this kind of hyperbolic venting. It may even (probably is) one reason why being a feminist is a self-identification for the minority these days, including a minority of women (only 7-9% of women here in the UK I believe, and something like 16-18% in the USA).
 
Last edited:
Tom Sawyer said:
Women have this lifetime of pent up anger and hatred and it's becoming far more socially acceptable for them to express this and demand better treatment. Men listening to them isn't the answer, it's changing what's acceptable behavior that's the answer.
Click to expand...

This isn't the mere demanding of better treatment from people who abused the writer. An article written like this about black people or jews or women or homosexuals or [pick your oppression Olympics winner] would be rightly dismissed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom