Korean Job Discussion Forums

[michaelambling]

In the past few years, I've noticed that American men increasingly sound gayer and gayer. If you listen to NPR (not the bastion of machismo, I admit), the broadcasters, professors, experts, etc. all sound increasingly gay.

I have a theory for this:

Since the rise of the single-family home, you have a lot of men who have been raised by women. Women have not only framed our identities and sexual politics (an entirely different problem), but they have also taught us how to speak. As such, we've increasingly developed effeminate speech patterns, and men sound gayer than ever before in human history.

What do you think, sweetie?

[samcheokguy]

Since we spend more time talking on the cell phone than previous generations, we use a higher pitched voice to speak all the time. Younger generations have a higher speaking voice because it works better. I sang baritone in Choir, but have a very high voice for a 6' plus man.

[Joe666]

Gentlemen - I belive the single family home is partly correct. It goes much further than that. Men are losing their masculinity due to multiple cultural aspects of our lovely planet. Men are slowly becoming obsolete due to equality of females, womens lib. etc. Women can have children without a male partner. Less males in the workforce (women taking positions that men would have acquired) leading to possibly these males staying at home, doing the chores etc. The equality aspect is a major contributor. I do not mean to sound sexist at all, just a fact. Plus the Y chromosome is a piece of shit. It's a decay product. Has been decaying for thousands of years. There will come a point in time (if humans don't self-extinguish) that there will be no male conterparts in the animal kingdom. It is already happening in some fish species. Since all of the animal kingdom originated in the seas, that would most likely be the place to first see the loss of the sexual male conterpart of a species. also, no more lands to conquer. A lot less wars are prevelent. There are a shit load of reasons for your comments!!

[ReeseDog]

Every now and then, I like to go into the woods, kill something, eat its heart raw (tradition), make a fire, and cook and eat its flesh out there, washing it down with quantities of beer. Afterward, satiated by the fresh meat and the thrill of the hunt, lying under the stars by the dying fire, I like to read a little Hemingway as I drift off to sleep.

Now I ask, is that gay?

[aboxofchocolates]

[aboxofchocolates]

[Joe666]

aboxofchocolates Writes:
I believe there is fossil evidence of extinct male fish carrying man-bags.


I am assuming by your pseudo-name, you are a female. If you are serious about the above statement, then please elaborate on the man-bags reference. Thank You.

[ReeseDog]

[aboxofchocolates]

[Joe666]

aboxofchocolates writes:I�m surprised you didn�t learn of this in high school biology- what are you, some sort of creationist or something?

To the contrary! You were joking about the above statement, YES! I am about 95% materialist (in evolution etc.) and the other 5% is holding out hope that there is a deity. That 5% is erroding very quickly I might add. As far as education goes, I can't remember very much from H.S. and my B.S. in the biology realm was geared more towards the health/human/cell/genetic frontier. The limited knowledge of evolution etc. I gained by reading post B.S. I love the acronym B.S. and it's duality. I never studied zoology,ecology or evolution in college. I wish I could have, but I had my hands full with other bio. and chem.

Your fish story still does not explain why at this point in time, male fish of some species are gone and the females of these species are providing offspring asexually. Your statement sounds like these facts happened thousands of years ago. And the opening statement "near the end of the male fish reign" makes it sound like there are no more male fish. I believe this hemaphroditic scenario is fairly new to scientists. Ma'am.

[it's full of stars]

Who's gonna change all the lightbulbs ?

[rubric]

[Temporary]

[Joe666]

rubric writes

Your Wimmins' Studies was a sad waste of time and money. Now you have nothing to contribute but some warped view of your own species imparted to you in the brainwashing process you called your degree. I suppose this is an inevitable result of compulsory education for the masses.
If civilization had been left in female hands we would still be living in grass huts.
Camille Paglia
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/c/camille_paglia.html

Those statements were not my personal view at all. They are the latest and greatest theories held by the science community. I believe I have plenty to contribute in regard to this subject. I obviously hit a tender spot on Mr. Rubric. To say my education was a sad waste of time and money really hurts my fragile ego and a brainy quote from one individual is almost meaningless to the subject at hand. I refuse to add to the discontent so frequently seen at Dave's and will end my message by saying I love you Mr. rubric and wish you a great day.

[blackjack]

another possibility is plant estrogens. It has been theorized that they are one of the reasons why girls are entering puberty so early now a days. So it is not unreasonable to suggest they are having an affect upon guys as well.

But honestly I don't believe that guys voices are getting higher.

The first theory, single mothers, just what was the percentage of single mothers 20-30 years ago?

cell phones please

Joe666 are you suggesting pathogenesis? There is a reason why most of the animal kingdom (and even part of the plant kingdom) uses sexual reproduction. Without it there is no genetic variability and species quickly die out (which is why it is normally only seen in plant). If you are suggesting hermaphroditism? there is no evidence to suggest that women will develop male sexual organs or the reverse.

And the y chromosome a decay product. Why then do so many animals have a y chromosome (or equivalent xz, zw, xo)