Women Protect Men Too Much

Anything to do with gender and the status of women and men.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Nick_A
Posts: 2142
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Women Protect Men Too Much

Post by Nick_A » Thu Nov 02, 2017 5:40 am

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/11 ... -much.html
Former first lady Michelle Obama explained Wednesday at a summit in Chicago that she believes men are “entitled,” and that women protect them too much.

Speaking at the first Obama Foundation international summit, Obama -- one of the event’s headliners -- said that men are essentially babied and protected by women, while women are raised to be “strong.”
“It’s like the problem in the world today is we love our boys, and we raise our girls,” Obama said. “We raise them to be strong, and sometimes we take care not to hurt men -- and I think we pay for that a little bit.”
She is right. Modern men are raised to be weak and women raised to be strong. From Mrs. Robinson:
Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio
Our nation turns its lonely eyes to you
Wu wu wu
What's that you say, Mrs. Robinson
Jolting Joe has left and gone away
Hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey
Joe is gone. John Wayne is gone. Look what’s replaced them as manly men in what is called entertainment. Case closed.

User avatar
Lacewing
Posts: 2228
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2015 2:25 am

Re: Women Protect Men Too Much

Post by Lacewing » Thu Nov 02, 2017 6:21 am

I'm going to guess that most women (based on all I've known in my life) are very perceptive while also being compassionate... so they see the man's over-bearing ego while compassionately recognizing how fragile he might feel without it. So the women cater to the men, because many women are used to being disrespected and invisible, and it has made them strong and resilient. Whereas the men need to get a lot of reassurance and praise from the women.

This has started to bug me over time though... because women are so fucking amazing and awesome... and it just seems like an absurd dance for men to continually get so much benefit and credit. And when men speak of women as if they are "things", either to be used or to be despised -- only because the man, himself, is too stupid and incapable to function equally alongside her -- then it shows how tragically ignorant the man is to the awesome power and spirit flowing through her. And yet he expects to stand above her, and talk down to her. It's really so very twisted.

I've said this before: men should be serving women. Wearing nothing but loin cloths. And the women would make them very, very happy... and show them the light... and everybody would be very fulfilled. :D But no... we have to pretend that the primitive ape-like characteristics of many (if not most) men are superior to the light of the goddesses shining through many (if not most) women. :lol:

EchoesOfTheHorizon
Posts: 375
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2017 6:08 am

Re: Women Protect Men Too Much

Post by EchoesOfTheHorizon » Thu Nov 02, 2017 6:46 am

I go out of the way to be respectful and appreciative of the role of First Ladies, it isn't their fault their husbands got it in their heads to do something as asinine as seek out the Office of the Presidency. They are mildly political at best.

This being said, I don't agree on the little presented here, but also lack the greater context. I'm guessing even with the context, I would less than approve, but then again they aren't elected to office, and aren't expected to be rocket scientists. She is entitled to her opinion, and we are not expected to accept it as established truth, or even a fair reflection of society. I will say a wife, especially a First Lady to the President, the commander in chief, should definitely go out of the way to be as supportive as possible to their spouse, and not treat the psyche of their spouse like it is a plaything. It is a mind of the most important person you know, and you should be as supportive as possible, help them blossom and assert themselves as positively as possible. This isn't a role merely for women, but also men, as well as that of parent.

If women are raised to be strong, it is usually because they had strong parents, who wanted the best for them. I'm doubtful introducing such a potentially sexist divisiveness will lead to strong minded offspring, be they male or women. More likely to inspire a psychic rift in the children. A inability to trust and connect, a lack of trust and confidence with the opposite sex, knowing the warped nature of the gender roles. Men and women should not be enemies, nor forced against one another as one being innately superior, forever at odds with one another. It is a absurd and unhealthy belief, doesn't do much to build a good family. Children deserve a good family.

duszek
Posts: 2141
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2009 5:27 pm
Location: Thin Air

Re: Women Protect Men Too Much

Post by duszek » Thu Nov 02, 2017 3:50 pm

An option:

men and women are buddies and build each other up in support groups,

or men and women coach each other if needs be.

Sounds boring ?

Nick_A
Posts: 2142
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: Women Protect Men Too Much

Post by Nick_A » Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:50 pm

It has become fashionable to assert tht men and women are the same justifying these efforts to feminize men. Is it really that illogical to believe that since the bodies of men and women differ, their gains may also? If true, as a whole men should be men and women should be women. But who knows what ideal men and women are anymore? Here are some basic differences in the male and female brain:

http://www.fitbrains.com/blog/women-men-brains/
A study completed recently in December 2013 on nearly 1,000 brain scans has surprisingly confirmed what many of us thought…that there are major differences between the male & female brain. Women’s and men’s brains are indeed wired in fundamentally different ways.
The research showed that on average, female brains are highly connected across the left and right hemispheres, and connections in male brains are typically stronger between the front and back regions. Men’s brains tend to perform tasks predominantly on the left-side, which is the logical/rational side of the brain. Women, on the other hand, use both sides of their brains because a woman’s brain has a larger Corpus Callosum, which means women can transfer data between the right and left hemispheres faster than men. These differences can invite essentially different reactions to the same stimuli
https://brightside.me/wonder-curiositie ... cs-339210/

One of the basic motives for this misguided belief that men and women are the same so men should be feminized is the need for secularism to eliminate the dominance of the nuclear family. It is the essential social unit for a free society. For the state to assume its role of supremacy it must eliminate the ideal of the nuclear family, the basic blend of ideal male and female attributes in which boys learn of men from their fathers and girls learn of women from their mothers. The cooperation of their differences is learned during family life. This is an ideal supporting a free society. It is intentionally being destroyed in favor of the state becoming the essential social unit for the desired secular slavery to the whims of the state. Is the ideal worth preserving even though it is often abused?

In the cycle of social devolution into social slavery and the loss of individuality “are men and boys becoming less masculine, or more liberated? Are they being feminized, or humanized?”

User avatar
Lacewing
Posts: 2228
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2015 2:25 am

Re: Women Protect Men Too Much

Post by Lacewing » Thu Nov 02, 2017 5:34 pm

duszek wrote:
Thu Nov 02, 2017 3:50 pm
An option:

men and women are buddies and build each other up in support groups,

or men and women coach each other if needs be.

Sounds boring ?
Sounds great!

It doesn't have to necessarily be in support groups, though. We can teach and support each other all the time by being authentically present and open without an agenda for the other person. It's a mindset and a choice. My male friends are like that... that's why they're my friends. :-) But I've had more than enough experience with men who are not that way (my male friends talk about experiencing it in other men too), and it's kind of shocking that such archaic male patterns still exist to the degree that they do.

For the record, I'd just like to say that despite the fun I have in being feistily outspoken here, I DO love men (yes, manly men)... not for their bodies... not for what they might do for me... but for their spirits! There’s a lot of beauty in men. I think that when we each recognize and drop our clunky patterns, egos, fears (a state that is not dependent on gender)... we make it possible to truly share and experience the euphoria of life together. :D

duszek
Posts: 2141
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2009 5:27 pm
Location: Thin Air

Re: Women Protect Men Too Much

Post by duszek » Thu Nov 02, 2017 6:40 pm

An idea:

a manly man may not want to be a tough guy all the time.
He might want to play some completely different roles.
It is possible to switch roles if we change the circumstances and the people around us.

Perhaps that´s why some men escape a critical wife and try to play a different role in a bar or pub.
A cocky one.

Nick_A
Posts: 2142
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: Women Protect Men Too Much

Post by Nick_A » Thu Nov 02, 2017 7:25 pm

duszek wrote:
Thu Nov 02, 2017 6:40 pm
An idea:

a manly man may not want to be a tough guy all the time.
He might want to play some completely different roles.
It is possible to switch roles if we change the circumstances and the people around us.

Perhaps that´s why some men escape a critical wife and try to play a different role in a bar or pub.
A cocky one.
Do you really define a manly man as a tough guy boor? Have we really forgotten the classic characteristics of a manly man and accepted their modern societal devolution into an ignorant boor?

User avatar
Sir-Sister-of-Suck
Posts: 518
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2017 4:09 am

Re: Women Protect Men Too Much

Post by Sir-Sister-of-Suck » Thu Nov 02, 2017 9:50 pm

I think it's starting to become the exact opposite. I think with the rise of third-wave feminism, many men are protecting women too much. I don't think it's popularized to be the majority, but it's a sizable margin

Actually, what I really think is a concern right now, is women protecting other women too much, only for the sake of being a woman. The sort of mob mentality that calls for people to join together for a social movement based on nothing more than their in-born traits, is how we get diabolical formations like Donna Hylton speaking at the women's march. It also just doesn't make sense, because the whole point against sexism is that we can't make sweeping generalizations about someones behavior or moral beliefs, which is exactly what a call like this attempts to do.

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 4119
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Women Protect Men Too Much

Post by Immanuel Can » Fri Nov 03, 2017 3:48 pm

Nick_A wrote:
Thu Nov 02, 2017 5:40 am
Joe is gone. John Wayne is gone. Look what’s replaced them as manly men in what is called entertainment. Case closed.
And yet, sociologically, women still always aim to "marry up."

The sociological analysis shows that inevitably, they want to marry someone richer, more powerful and more able in some important way than they are. That's a biological norm, and not entirely an unhealthy one: if you're going to trust someone to protect and provide during reproductive cycles, you're better off with a guy who seems like he can do the job. But it's more than that, because even women who are accomplished and financially secure...say, the bosses of their own company...tend to select mates that are higher than they are in some important, conventional male metric.

And, conversely, as a statistical average, women tend to reject men whom they see as merely "equal" or *gasp* "lower" than they are in the socio-sexual hierarchy. It's the classic, "We're just friends," or "I couldn't date him...he's like my brother!" And how often is that said? :lol:

So women want stronger, wealthier, more assertive men as their own mates; but want most other men as essentially docile, deferential, needy, emotional and compliant in theory, and they expect them to act that way in the workplace, in entertainment or in government.

And how does that work?

User avatar
Lacewing
Posts: 2228
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2015 2:25 am

Re: Women Protect Men Too Much

Post by Lacewing » Fri Nov 03, 2017 4:27 pm

Immanuel Can wrote:
Fri Nov 03, 2017 3:48 pm
The sociological analysis shows that inevitably, they want to marry someone richer, more powerful and more able in some important way than they are.
What sociological analysis? You mean, YOUR analysis... which tends to be bloated, skewed, and dishonest? :)

Nearly ALL of the women I've known closely over the years, including myself, are kick-ass successful women who have been the major earners in their relationships... and they chose their male partners for >> FUN <<! Their partners have been their PLAYMATES... NOT their providers. Furthermore, many men seem not to know what they are supposed to be/do/offer anymore... since women are allowed to be fully capable on their own. I've seen many men choose to be potheads, and appear to "give up" and let the women take care of them (rather than explore and stretch themselves beyond past conventions). To me it appears to be a turning point for male consciousness -- out of being emperors, into being partners. Many probably can't make the shift, as they're too needy for the delusion of being authorities and supreme over women/others. But for the men who can be honest, honorable, and brave -- to recognize their EQUAL place and responsibility within ALL, and how beautiful and powerful that EQUALLY is -- I think it could be an astounding transformation for mankind! :D

Don't know what OLD or contrived models you're working from in your head, but there's a lot more going on in this world than you seem to be aware of.

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 4119
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Women Protect Men Too Much

Post by Immanuel Can » Fri Nov 03, 2017 6:17 pm

Lacewing wrote:
Fri Nov 03, 2017 4:27 pm
What sociological analysis?
Well, this, for example: https://www.livescience.com/9487-women- ... lings.html

or this:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/in ... fe-partner

or this:

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 132636.htm

How many do you want? I'm certain I can supply you with more than you wish.

Nick_A
Posts: 2142
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: Women Protect Men Too Much

Post by Nick_A » Fri Nov 03, 2017 7:21 pm

Cultures move in cycles, In ancient times many men preferred to live on the roof rather than with a contentious wife
Proverbs 21:9
It is better to live in a corner of a roof Than in a house shared with a contentious woman.
Men often had no alternative than to become philosophers
By all means marry: If you get a good wife, you'll become happy; if you get a bad one, you'll become a philosopher.” Socrates
The evolving marriage reached it cultural peak leading to the “good wife.” Men became happier and the result was less philosophy

https://www.littlethings.com/1950s-good ... ife-guide/

Now men are being demoted into walking dollar signs without the compensating feature of good philosophy. Where will it end? Only the shadow knows.

User avatar
Lacewing
Posts: 2228
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2015 2:25 am

Re: Women Protect Men Too Much

Post by Lacewing » Fri Nov 03, 2017 11:38 pm

Immanuel Can wrote:
Fri Nov 03, 2017 6:17 pm
Lacewing wrote:
Fri Nov 03, 2017 4:27 pm
What sociological analysis?
Well, this, for example: https://www.livescience.com/9487-women- ... lings.html

or this:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/in ... fe-partner

or this:

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 132636.htm

How many do you want? I'm certain I can supply you with more than you wish.
None of these articles supported what you said. You must have done a simple Search online, and then scanned for key phrases without really reading your references. This fits your dishonest, slimy style -- but the laziness was a surprise. Your arrogance is laughable (as always).

Live Science article... from 2007... says: “women judge men based on how masculine their features are. Men with square jaws and well-defined brow ridges are seen as good short-term partners, while those with more feminine traits such as a rounder face and fuller lips are perceived as better long-term mates.”

Psychology Today article... from 2014... says: “people's preferences in the search for a mate are expected to shift as social roles and norms shift”. There is a wide range of factors that lead to attraction, and the author concluded with this: “The winner—the final selection among all the worthy candidates—is decided by a subjective internal process that is obscure and whimsical and does not necessarily obey the dictates of rationality, evolutionary mandates, cultural pressures, or even our own conscious will, plans or intentions. At the end of the day, as the philosopher Blaise Pascal said, the heart has reasons that reason doesn’t understand.”

Science Daily... from 2014... discusses how women are more impacted by the way information is framed. The way a person is described, whether in a positive way vs. a negative way for the same characteristics, will matter more to a woman (and impact her decision) more than it matters to a man.

So, I.C., this collection represents the “sociological analysis” that backs up your claims, although it's clearly inapplicable? Your sneaky techniques don't work outside of your self-serving fantasy religious discussions, which have pretty much ruined your credibility.

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 4119
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Women Protect Men Too Much

Post by Immanuel Can » Sat Nov 04, 2017 1:51 pm

Lacewing wrote:
Fri Nov 03, 2017 11:38 pm
Immanuel Can wrote:
Fri Nov 03, 2017 6:17 pm
Lacewing wrote:
Fri Nov 03, 2017 4:27 pm
What sociological analysis?
Well, this, for example: https://www.livescience.com/9487-women- ... lings.html

or this:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/in ... fe-partner

or this:

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 132636.htm
For example, the first article:

Overwhelmingly, participants said those with more masculine features were likely to be risky and competitive and also more apt to fight, challenge bosses, cheat on spouses and put less effort into parenting. Those with more feminine faces were seen as good parents and husbands, hard workers and emotionally supportive mates [compare examples].

Despite all the negative attributes, when asked who they would choose for a short-term relationship, women still selected the more masculine looking men.


Get that? The women "overwhelmingly" preferred males that they perceived to be "more apt to fight, challenge...cheat...not parent."

Now, whether or not the facial features are a good indicator is neither here nor there -- what's clear from that study is that women "overwhelmingly" prefer the males who have the traditional "high status" male traits of aggression, irresponsibility and risk-taking behaviour, and to reject the soft, nurturing types, the tame ones. So even there, it's clear you've cherry picked from within the articles, selecting a statement from each you could regard as innocuous against your case, and ignoring others completely.

I could go on. But why bother? For, as usual, you end with the ad hominem fallacy, your last refuge every time, it seems.

But that's fine: I pretty much expected that. Happy trails.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests