| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
yawarakaijin
Joined: 08 Aug 2006
|
 Posted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 1:37 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Koveras wrote: |
| I don't think he's imbalanced at all. He's given to hyperbole, but I think his position is essentially correct. Western civilization has crashed and burned, and feminism was either a cause or an effect of that disaster. I say effect, Cornfed says cause. |
| Quote: |
| given that with today's women a mere oral dose might not suffice. |
That one line there says what he thinks of women. Insinuating that women are disease ridden whores is mere hyperbole? This man has proven his utter distaste for women in mulitiple threads in a myriad of ways. Sure he may couch many of his arguments as discussions on feminism or what have you but it is quite clear that it goes way beyond that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
itaewonguy
Joined: 25 Mar 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 3:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
well married doesn't have to be the way you have discribed!
you are talking about a selected few. what about the millions who are not dirvorced , who are happily married and will stick by each other through thick and thin?.. my grandparents have been happily married for 60 years.. no religion keeps them together they are hardcore scientists!
you find that right person and its all good,
if a human has hidden burning desires, like maybe The woman is freaky into S & M and she knows her husband is not the type, she should fullfill those desires secretly.. and if a man is a full blown sex addict and needs different kind of loving, he shoud keep those desires secret and fullfill them when he needs too, but if you can balance those desires in life or even addictions and still love your partner and your marriage! no reason you cant live a happy marriage.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tiger Beer
Joined: 07 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 5:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
OP, certainly an interesting post! A lot of truth.
However, behind the scenes, there are countless upon countless of just normal people getting married all over the place.
But when I lived in New York City, I could certainly see where what you wrote would apply, I'm sure it would be similar in Los Angeles and Miami. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Temporary
Joined: 13 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 3:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
See the whole key to this mess is Sex and Kids..
If you don't want Kids there is really no point in Sex is there? If you don't really crave sex very much because of various reasons there is absolutely no point in Marriage at all. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Perceptioncheck
Joined: 13 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 6:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Temporary wrote: |
See the whole key to this mess is Sex and Kids..
If you don't want Kids there is really no point in Sex is there? If you don't really crave sex very much because of various reasons there is absolutely no point in Marriage at all. |
Gee, I'm glad you figured that one out for us.
And there I was having sex for FUN! What the hell was I thinking?!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rae
Joined: 10 Oct 2007
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 6:33 pm Post subject: Re: Is marriage still a realistic proposition? |
|
|
| Cornfed wrote: |
| alpha males tended to be intrinsically superior in some way, in modern society they tend to be complete scumbags. |
I completely agree, although this is about the only thing I agree with.
You've noted all the old-school gender roles, and you're right, in our modern-day society, old-fashioned roles are well, outdated. So if a man deems his worth only by his bank account, he's screwed. And no half-decent, modern-day woman would want someone that just has money anyway. Why? Because society today allows us to be our own person and not just Joe Shmoe's wifey.
Also, who says the successful *beep* (what yesteryear claimed as the alpha male) is the more valued male prototype in 2008? There's a ton of successful pricks out there and women their own age normally realize these men are not marriage material.
It all comes down to ideals and most of the time, rethinking your own ideals. If you want a family, live an average life, and don't want an entourage, then find a woman that will value that above all else. It's the same as the successful bastards that only want looks.
It actually works if both needs are met:
Couple 1:
Successful and wealthy *beep* values looks about all else.
He finds a model, a little dumb, but good in bed. It works!
But if she gets older, gains weight, has wrinkles, then it's over.
Same goes for her if he loses his job.
Couple 2:
Average guy, wants to have a family, and a relatively simple life.
He finds a girl that doesn't want a successful *beep* and values a hardworking, honest guy that values family.
It works.
Couple 3 (is what most of us fall into and why it seems impossible):
Average guy, claims he wants a good woman to raise a family, but he's secretly lusting over the clueless bombshell.
Clueless bombshell is at first taken by his guy-next-door charms, then when the lifestyle they live isn't meeting her needs, she finds the successful *beep* that can give it to her.
OR
Nice, honest girl wants a nice honest guy but is always taken by either the badboy, or is highly intrigued by the successful *beep*. They work momentarily until they realize their needs aren't met. Then they get bitter, and think that all relationships don't work.
"Know exactly what you want and everything else will follow". That's the wise advice I got. But it's a ton harder than it seems since it's hard to differentiate personal ideals from what society deems important. For those pursuing personal growth, we're in a good position doing it here in Korea, a land that's so far from our element.
BUT my personal gripe about marriage is about change. It's a huge gamble to hope that the nice person that shares your ideals now, won't change into someone you really don't want. Or vice versa  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mistermasan
Joined: 20 Sep 2007
Location: 10+ yrs on Dave's ESL cafe
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 8:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
wouldn't the ultimate product of feminism as discussed earlier be polymandry?
in such a system, one woman is supported by many men. kind like welfare with benefits. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ukon
Joined: 29 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 8:38 pm Post subject: Re: Is marriage still a realistic proposition? |
|
|
| Cornfed wrote: |
Corporate CEOs, gang leaders, drug dealers, wealthy playboys, professional athletes, movie stars etc. � these people can get practically unlimited sex from modern Western women due to their social position in their respective subcultures. Not only will the hot women only have sex with them, but they can easily monopolize all women in a given context since they will often be prepared to give the bowsers one after they've had a few. As to your ordinary, decent Joes doing the real work and coming up with creative solutions to keep society going behind the scenes, who make good fathers and role models for children � they just don't rate as far as most of today's women are concerned, even if they happen to be nominally married to one of them.
|
Most of the 'playboys" I've met get women because they have awesome personalities and know how to play the game....The world could use more of them as far as I'm concerned....
Contrary to your rantings, most women aren't gonna sleep with a guy solely because he has money or he's an actor....you actually need a personality..... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Temporary
Joined: 13 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 8:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Perceptioncheck wrote: |
| Temporary wrote: |
See the whole key to this mess is Sex and Kids..
If you don't want Kids there is really no point in Sex is there? If you don't really crave sex very much because of various reasons there is absolutely no point in Marriage at all. |
Gee, I'm glad you figured that one out for us.
And there I was having sex for FUN! What the hell was I thinking?!! |
Ahh typical male response. *beep* leading the way. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Koveras
Joined: 09 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 9:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| What about the ostensible topic of the thread? Divorce rates are sky high, and American men in general shy away from being fathers. Most sociologists point to the post-modern ethos of instant fulfillment, not feminism, but either way the question is a good one: is marriage still a realistic proposition? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aboxofchocolates
Joined: 21 Mar 2008
Location: on your mind
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 9:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Temporary wrote: |
| Perceptioncheck wrote: |
| Temporary wrote: |
See the whole key to this mess is Sex and Kids..
If you don't want Kids there is really no point in Sex is there? If you don't really crave sex very much because of various reasons there is absolutely no point in Marriage at all. |
Gee, I'm glad you figured that one out for us.
And there I was having sex for FUN! What the hell was I thinking?!! |
Ahh typical male response. *beep* leading the way. |
And that's why she is called "perceptioncheck". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Perceptioncheck
Joined: 13 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 10:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| aboxofchocolates wrote: |
| Temporary wrote: |
| Perceptioncheck wrote: |
| Temporary wrote: |
See the whole key to this mess is Sex and Kids..
If you don't want Kids there is really no point in Sex is there? If you don't really crave sex very much because of various reasons there is absolutely no point in Marriage at all. |
Gee, I'm glad you figured that one out for us.
And there I was having sex for FUN! What the hell was I thinking?!! |
Ahh typical male response. *beep* leading the way. |
And that's why she is called "perceptioncheck". |
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Enrico Palazzo
Mod Team
Joined: 11 Mar 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 13, 2008 8:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Cornfed wrote: |
| Justin Hale wrote: |
| Cornfed wrote: |
| consider the fact that for humans, like for most mammals, monogamy is not the natural condition |
For human males, it is. Polygamy would be great for a privileged few males and a complete disaster for the rest. |
But that's exactly my point. Polygamy/ the harem system is the de facto result of feminism and, within the context of contemporary society, it is indeed a disaster for most of us, especially should we try to maitain stable marriages. |
Polygamy is the result of feminism? Perhaps, we need some Cass to understand that one. Polygamy originated in very patriarchal societies where women were considered to be chattle. Do you want women to be chattle? Anyway, what's up with all these hostile posts pointed at North American women? For a stable marriage, you need to healthy human beings of the opposite sex coming together. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
laogaiguk
Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Location: somewhere in Korea
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 13, 2008 8:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I do wonder how much farther we would be scientifically if we had let women into the field even 2000 years ago. Don't get me wrong, for a lot of time, women had to be the ones at home while the men went out. Thats how our bodies and psychologies were made (though obviously not now). But if they had even tried to allow women into scientific circles... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
