|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 11:44 AM June 30th, 2005 EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
Any one ever hear the reasons feminists give for when women cheat?
It goes something like this; "Men cheat because of who men are. Women cheat because of who men are..."
Talk about contrived logic.
Shut UP...!
Well, let's see how long (P)MSN's apiffany lasts. My guess is it won't last long. It rarely does in these cases.
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Raymond Cuttill on 01:31 PM July 3rd, 2005 EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Thundercloud. See you at the Men’s Equality Congress.
The main reason for this kind of article is that it is getting difficult to claim that women don’t have affairs. The evidence is amassing that women do. This article gives two reasons for affairs; relationship problems and sexual needs. When they were saying “men cheat!” we heard nothing of this, affairs were inexcusable, but now it’s clear that women cheat too we have to have excuses for them. (Incidentally we are now seeing animal programmes that tell us how unnatural monogamy is.) So now it can be his fault if she cheats, so MSN is being true to itself. If you can’t claim that women don’t lie cheat, hit, kill then you find excuses for why they lie, cheat, hit, kill. Don’t hold your breath to hear how it’s her fault when he cheats.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:54 PM June 30th, 2005 EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
...Notice at the bottom of the article there is a 'Is he Cheating' Quiz and not a 'Is SHE cheating Quiz' ?
Incidentally I tried the Quiz and got the result "Women tend to under-react"!!!!
WHAT THE F***! Are they 'aving a laugh!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Tumescent on 08:31 PM June 30th, 2005 EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
Well... it IS on the MSN "Women's" Page so I guess it wouldn't make sense to have a "Is she cheating" quiz here ... not unless there are a lot of lesbians reading. Maybe a better question is why isn't there a MSN "Men's" Page. Most computer users are men, one would think MSN would figure that out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 11:50 PM June 30th, 2005 EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
I once asked and was shown to the sports page. Just another reason to avoid Microsoft whenever possible.
dipy911
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by ArtflDgr on 09:14 AM July 1st, 2005 EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
From an evolutionary perspective, these explanations stop short of an answer. to tell me that someone does this because of xxx doesnt tell me why they feel xxx.
their reasoning makes little sense in the light that certain things happen in certain time frames. the 'itches' of which it is the women that actually get it! for having the itch at the right time causes her to maximize her genetic legacy by having more combinations. however if she cant do better or the man is already high on the scale then the best mating strategy is not to mix with others.
these are mating strategies... a woman that has a wealthy husband and has one kid by him, and secrety one kid by someone with physically superior genes would allow her to maximize her genetics...
men cheat too, of course... so it would be expected that those that travel or have short term visits to places away from their mates, would lead to more sowing of seeds. why? for it allows this system to work for BOTH...
he gets to spread a bit of himself, and the lady he may be bumping into if she is cheating, is picking up a free genetic gift.
THATS why its done... so now you have to figure out what mechanisms cause it. environmental pressures is what we respond to and they skew whats acceptable... so under one environmental pressure a behavior is unacceptable, while under another it becomes fine. so in an age where literal survival was high, fidelity is more important (and we just came out of that situation in the past 100 years). now that there is plenty, we are more on short term mating strategies. especially the women (too bad they dont realize that you cant turn a short term mate into a long term mate just by switching strategies in mid stream).
this is why birth control does not work (when the women uses it). by playing a short term strategy she can be with (for short term) a person with genetics that she could not get if she was proposing a long term strategy (obviously when the girl talks to the really hot guy with all the girls hanging on him she isnt going to get anywhere)... so how does she then secure this? easy, give in to the short term... then sometime conviently switch, and get pregnant, and then see if she can get a long term out of it. sometimes it works sometime it doesnt, however, in the land of plenty the kids live, and so its a good strategy. now what may be a good strategy for the species can have awful reprocussions for the individual. nature does not care if we are all happy or if we are all totally miserable.
if you can convince women that in general men are no good then you have planted seeds that shorten HERE commitment. the person you have is never as exciting as the potential person you can dream of. it used to be that a grandmother or mother was around and would say "dont be stupid, you have a good man here, you dont want to learn that the hard way dear". those elders are not around, many are just as screwed up, and we have turned to magazines and celebrities as our elders. we have a disposition to listent to them, and women have more of that suggestability. why? because they dont compete as hard against each other as men do. so women can afford (in the wild past) better to listen to others. as well as perspective she gains group cohesion. a man who listens the same way to another man may find that he is getting manipulated out of being with other women or getting ahead, etc.
this is why the femnits have been generally more successful over the long haul of gaining cohesion.
i would suggest that men just do their own thing and stop playing the game. learn to be as choosey as the ladies. if the ladies dont like it then tough. we, as men, do not spend enough effort in weeding out the nutjobs, and spend too much time making excuses to obtain physical beauty at the expense of mental quality. if we select for women with better personalities, we will have better mates, stronger relationshps, and would breed out the scum.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
Well it's not quite the whole truth, but for MSN, it's a start anyway.