|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 05:06 AM November 7th, 2005 EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
...so am I too conclude that I would be really happy if I were a complete failure?
Somehow I think I would rather struggle with the challenge of depression from too much success, rather than the depression from too little.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:46 PM November 7th, 2005 EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
It's the same old "money doesn't make you happy" B.S. that seeks to make men who make money somehow bad.
Try living without money. Then you learn what it means to be unhappy at the first sign of a health problem like a routine staff infection.
Try not being able to persue a hobby because of lack of money.
Wealth may not make men happy, but you sure as hell are miserable without it.
Warble
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 09:09 AM November 7th, 2005 EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
How about an actual piece of journalism talking about male suicide, which happens at a rate 3 to 4 times greater than the rate for women, despite the fact that depression is reported in more women than men? I guess it's just a matter of figuring out how to make it the man's fault before they print it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:07 PM November 7th, 2005 EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
Let's see:
1. Men seek to succeed based on something 'dark' in their psyche.
2. When they succeed, the requirements of the responsibility associated with success can't be handled.
You know, this whole analysis started from a false basic premise, then degraded from there.
Time was when at least SOME of the male population was raised with the following basic premises:
1. It is your responsibility to make something valuable of your life, to contribute to the society that has already given to you. Making a great deal of money and assuming positions of power may be part of this process, but are not, in and of themselves, the end goal.
2. Responsibility may require that you end up standing alone. You are not a God, but you must, carefully, thoughtfully and humanely, follow the dictates of your own conscience.
The above ideas (indeed, any ideas similar to these) seem to have disappeared from popular discourse, and indeed, from the very institutions that used to be entrusted with keeping them.
What you get in the absence of the above premises is the analysis on MSN...the sick analyzing the sick. Neither has a clue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:53 PM November 7th, 2005 EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
"Men seek to succeed based on something 'dark' in their psyche. "
What bullshit. It is more feminist crap. Now they are trying to make people feel sorry for successful males.
Being successful does require sacrifice, and being successful most certainly leads to happiness.
Successful men know that it feels damn good to attain a goal and to set new ones that are achievable.
To suggest that men have a dark side that leads them to achievement is pure Marxist-Feminist bullshit.
It is the same old communist argument with a new covering. How transparent.
It’s the same old men are evil bullshit.
It is like saying that if men are successful then they are evil because it was motivated by darkness (AKA evil intentions). The article is intrinsically evil.
Warble
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:43 PM November 7th, 2005 EST (#7)
|
|
|
|
|
Warble,
I hope you understand that when I wrote:
"Men seek to succeed based on something 'dark' in their psyche. "
I considered it utter nonsense from the original MSN article. I am in full agreement with your addendum to my response.
Men SHOULD succeed. That may involve money and power; it may also mean dying on the field of battle in a just cause without ever acquiring either money or power. It may involve discovering the last piece to the Unified Field Theory (if it is unified). Whatever.
But this wallowing in depression and manufactured guilt is nonsense. There are higher callings that men USED to be taught.
anon
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 07:11 PM November 7th, 2005 EST (#8)
|
|
|
|
|
Ya. I got that. You rejected the presumption, which was pure absolute bullshit.
Warble
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:19 PM November 7th, 2005 EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
The piece is well written, if only from a clinical-psychology perspective. It might have done more to look in depth at men's socializing experiences and the cultural/gender reinforcers for accepting and even engineering male depression as a part of the price of masculinity.
I wondered after reading the article if the reality of pervasive depression might provide a potential "talking point" between feminists and MRAs.
Clearly feminists are suffering from a type of depression. Their utopian vision of gender reconstruction has not panned out too well. While they celebrate "girl power," too many of the powerful girls are wondering where the powerful, exciting men have disappeared to ...
And apparently the powerful, exciting men are living lives of successful quiet desperation, contemplating suicide, and why they have wasted their lives pursuing false gods,soul-deadening careers, and domestic servitude in loveless marriages.
So, if feminists and MRAs indeed have something in common, if only their mutual discontents, that ought to spark some recognition that the "other" is not only the "enemy," but also a suffering human being.
(That's the only Maureen Dowd impression I'll ever write hereabouts! ;-) )
(roy)
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
MSN surprised me with