|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There's a win-win solution here in between the lines.
Since growing numbers of young American men are foresaking marriage (a recent national survey suggests as high as 53%), it seems only logical that the U.S.' husband-less females need to learn a foreign language and market themselves to the countries with surplus wed-able males!
'Course, there might be some small problem of acculturation and domestic compatibility given that our nation's aging potential brides have been socialized to be man-hating feminists.
But if marriage and child-bearing take precedence over ideology for these desperate gals, wouldn't you think they'd give up few outdated cultural ideas for a suitable Indian, Chinese, or Saudi husband?
I'd be willing to have my taxes raised to help fund an expatriation program for qualified single feminists!
"It's a terrible thing ... living in fear."
- Roy: hunted replicant, Blade Runner
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thomas... thanks for your statistical clarity.
It's important that MRA's strive for accuracy in all of our arguments.
I should have read more closely!
"It's a terrible thing ... living in fear."
- Roy: hunted replicant, Blade Runner
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:46 PM July 20th, 2004 EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
Wouldn't it be easier to just make up stuff and have the media parrot it, like the feminists do?
Then we'd never HAVE to worry about whether our facts were accurate or not. (grin)
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hey T-cloud,
Ever notice that there's only one letter's deviation between a feminist FACT and a feminist FART?
Makes you wanna go hmmmmmm?
"It's a terrible thing ... living in fear."
- Roy: hunted replicant, Blade Runner
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'd be willing to have my taxes raised to help fund an expatriation program for qualified single feminists!
Being the tax-disliking semi-Objectivist that I am, I am always suspect of programs which require raising taxes.
But in this case, I'd be damn tempted to make an exception. It would be worth paying out a few extra dollars if it would mean getting some pampered, coddled American feminists out of our hair. Let her shop for love overseas, and I'll be more than happy to pay for her one-way plane ticket over there.
"Existence exists. A is A." -Ayn Rand
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't see the article on men's health as being misandric. It makes some good points, really. I used to do all manner of dumb-a$$ stuff in my early 20s in an effort to get status and attention (leading perhaps, subconsciously assumed, to more 'dates', though I don't think it ever did). I really am amazed I didn't croak during that period sometimes. But there may well be a level of source misattribution in the article, or an incompleteness in the analysis: what causes human behavior is rarely as simple as mating imperatives, yet even for men! ;) Could it be also that male biology, esp. in youth, along with social programming, tends to impel men to seek out stimulation and generally at greater rates and by more extreme means than women on average? Extreme sports for example was a concept pioneered uniformly by young men, without the company of women. Some women got the word and wanted to join in. Of course not all 20-x men are into extreme sports, too. But if out of 100 extreme sports participants, 95 are men, and not all of them seem much interested in spending time with a gf (as is often the case), then doesn't that poke a few holes in the assumption that male displays of vigor and/or skill are primarily in place to attract females?
Anyway, all told, I think the health issue article is not so bad and if it gets people to start looking at men's health, it's a good thing. The death rate stats. are alas not common knowledge; articles like this one may help change that and encourage people to examine their own beliefs and prejudices about the well-being of men in society, and perhaps I hope as well their own actions in an effort to keep themselves and/or their male friends, etc., alive longer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I agree that the second article isn't too bad. He does seem to want to imply that the risks are for mating. Which maybe they are, but there are other reasons. Other possibilites are that men are less risk-averse. They are more willing to take risks, this could be evolutionary as in hunting, a very risky endeavor, but one which comes with great reward.
It is true history favors the bold. It would be intresting to see it also used to describe why men are more likely to start companies which may or may not fail, thus putting them in great financial risk, while potentially reaping great reward. It would be nice to see them mention the benefits of not being afraid of potential of harm if the reward is worth it. Thus maybe educators need to be directing young men towards various risks which are healthy such as politics, firefireghters, scientists, buisnessmen. Places where risks can be great if not physical in nature. For politicians can put their careers on the line with a contriversial decision, risky for them, but possibly the right course of action. Buisnessmen risk fisical problems with start-up companies, and scientists can put their future presitege on the line with possibly contridictory, or groundbreaking research which may, or may not turn out to be correct.
Without that ability to look at daunting, potentially deadly tasks and take risks, one could easily say our world would be much worse off. Craving risk, and excitement does not need to have extremedangers if people are taught to control their urges, and focus them on areas where they have the potential to do good for society.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
