|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Hunchback on 02:28 AM January 15th, 2005 EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
For 4 decades feminists have been taking facts, trends, and common truths and turning them backwards 180 degrees and hoping no one would notice. Heretofore they have been quite successful. Check out this remarkable statement from the article:
"The hypothesis," Dr. Brown said, "is that there are evolutionary pressures on males to take steps to minimize the risk of raising offspring that are not their own." Women, by contrast, did not show a marked difference in their attraction to men who might work above or below them.
For thousands of years it has been common knowledge that females insist on "marrying up." Regardless of the social pressures for doing so—e.g., lack of a vehicle for upward mobility—this has long been accepted as the case. In one quick sentence the researcher turns this obvious fact on its head and claims that men insist on marrying down. A couple of decades ago this blatant flipping of reality would have simply been accepted wholecloth; her assertions would have quickly found their way into popular lore.
"I haven't dated in 12 million years," [Carrie Fisher] said drily. "I gave up on dating powerful men because they wanted to date women in the service professions. So I decided to date guys in the service professions. But then I found out that kings want to be treated like kings, and consorts want to be treated like kings, too."
So, if you closely examine this statement, she admits that the powerful men want to be treated like kings. The implication is that she has no problem with that. Her only problem is with the less powerful men who deign to expect to be treated just as well.
She is condemned by her own words.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by mens_issues on 12:39 PM January 15th, 2005 EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
"I haven't dated in 12 million years," [Carrie Fisher] said drily."
Well, if she's that old perhaps her age has something to do with it ;)
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:03 PM January 15th, 2005 EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
No, Mzzzz. Dowd.
More and more of us want nothing to do with women at all...,
"Not all men are fools.
Some are bachelors."
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by mens_issues on 09:09 PM January 15th, 2005 EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
I was thinking of posting the story that I created (in which you joined the "Knights of the Patriarchal Order" and saved Thea from the feminist dungeon) in a few other groups (like Men's Issues Online). I was wondering if it would be OK if I used the name "Thundercloud," or if you'd prefer that I substitute another name.
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 05:37 PM January 16th, 2005 EST (#9)
|
|
|
|
|
No, not at all.
Be my guest, use the name to your heart's content! :-)
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:14 PM January 25th, 2005 EST (#20)
|
|
|
|
|
"I was thinking of posting the story that I created (in which you joined the "Knights of the Patriarchal Order" and saved Thea from the feminist dungeon) in a few other groups (like Men's Issues Online). "
please don't tell me you're fucking serious.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by crescentluna
(evil_maiden @ yahoo.com)
on 08:27 PM January 18th, 2005 EST (#16)
|
|
|
|
|
On another message board I frequent, there's a young woman [24-years-old, I believe] who is upset because the older man she is dating doesn't make enough [45k/year] or even if that was enough, he isn't spending enough of it on her. One of her exact quotes was "my friends have boyfriends who pay their bills - I don't think I'm being selfish here." granted, from the rest of her post their relationship sounded wacky for other reasons, but wow. I feel so removed from my generation sometimes.
Though I make more than my bf and don't base my affections on his income, so I guess my opinion in this topic is kinda nil. ;P
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Boy Genteel on 02:27 PM January 19th, 2005 EST (#17)
|
|
|
|
|
** On another message board I frequent, there's a young woman [24-years-old, I believe] who is upset because the older man she is dating doesn't make enough [45k/year] or even if that was enough, he isn't spending enough of it on her. One of her exact quotes was "my friends have boyfriends who pay their bills - I don't think I'm being selfish here." **
Did anyone respond to this person, and, if so, what was her response?
bg
Men are from EARTH. Women are from EARTH. Deal with it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 05:22 PM January 15th, 2005 EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
Men are tired of women expecting men to serve as wallets while women choose their fulfullment of the day.
And given the biased divorce laws, I would much rather marry a woman making much more money than me. Unfortunately, anyone living in the real world knows that women go for men with money. And why is it that men are "expected" to pay for dates?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Thomas Jefferson on 10:37 PM January 15th, 2005 EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
The only reason I checked this link was because someone posted it and I wanted to be aware of the discussion. Does anyone really read Maureen Dowd anymore, let alone take her seriously? At the very sight of her byline, you can guess the jist of her lastest rant. That is (1) women anre helpless to control their on emotions and circumstances and (2) it's all mens fault. Besides being so friggin' predictable, she is down right insulting. Insulting to men, who hates, insulting to women, who she paints as incompetant and helpless, and insulting to the intelligence of reader.
Women in staff support are the new sirens because, as a guy I know put it, they look upon the men they work for as "the moon, the sun and the stars." It's all about orbiting, serving and salaaming their Sun Gods.
The simpler explaination is that the couple got to know each other very well by working closely together and developed a strong mutual bond. That's the way thing used to work in the era before over-reactive sexual harrassment laws. Nowadays, people have to struggle with finding someone in a niteclub or a personal ad. How do tell the difference between an infactuation and a relationship? I believe it was Daphne Patai in her book, "Heterophobia," that she discusses the benefits to women of dating someone who have a pre-existing relationship with instead of a stranger at a bar.
I'd been noticing a trend along these lines, as famous and powerful men took up with the young women whose job it was to tend to them and care for them in some way: their secretaries, assistants, nannies, caterers, flight attendants, researchers and fact-checkers.
Is there anyone here that was able to contain the laughter? For the love of God Almighty, it's been a trend since the dawn of humanity: WOMEN MARRY UP. Nevertheless, I suppose we should give Dowd credit that she's finally noticed it. Perhaps with a few more bursts of inspiration such as this, she'll be on her fast track to winning the Nobel Prize. I just wished she'd told us, whether it came to her after considerable thought or if it was more in the form of a revelation [Heavy Sarcarm]
In all those great Tracy/Hepburn movies more than a half-century ago, it was the snap and crackle of a romance between equals that was so exciting.
These gender feminists/female supremacists have the quite the knack for argueing both sides of the issue simultaneously. Here she talks about, "equals", a half century ago. What happened to the brumbeat of women are the oppressed victims of the patriarchy that these disenguous banshes won't quit with?
Tracy/Hepburn movies ... In James Brooks's "Spanglish," ... Faye Dunaway in "Network" ... Glenn Close in "Fatal Attraction" ... Richard Curtis's "Love Actually," ...etc.
Using plots from fictional films as research is lame. It shows her limited mentality. She's not grounded in reality, we always knew that, but now she's gone ahead and shown us with her own words.
We are not to expect to be translated from despotism to liberty in a featherbed. -- Thomas Jefferson
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by mens_issues on 12:24 AM January 16th, 2005 EST (#7)
|
|
|
|
|
Wow, Thomas Jefferson replied to my post. I thought you died back in 1826. Looks like you outlived your arch-rival John Adams after all. And I do mean to visit Monticello some day ;)
Seriously, though, you're right on about the Dowd article. I think of her as "The face that sunk a thousand ships."
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:55 PM January 16th, 2005 EST (#8)
|
|
|
|
|
(Ms. Dowd) -- "Women, by contrast, did not show a marked difference in their attraction to men who might work above or below them.."
This woman has been living in a Manhattan NY condo ice cave, apparently, where nothing resembling reality ever intrudes.
To refute her argument in two minutes, just visit any of the dozens of Internet dating sites, and read the advertisements that the self-confessed female "merchandise" have posted.
"Financially secure" is the most common quality sought in a male prospect ("victim?"), followed by "honest," "fun", and "talkative."
The women seeking men do not typically advertise for hard-working, blue-collar laborers who read existential philosophy after their factory shifts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 05:43 PM January 16th, 2005 EST (#10)
|
|
|
|
|
I dunno, I read a little Robert Frost, now and then when I come home from work.
'wonder if that counts...?
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Clancy
(long_ponytail@yahoo.com)
on 02:36 PM January 17th, 2005 EST (#13)
|
|
|
|
|
I've read hundreds of personals of "women seeking men." Some are not so particular regarding salary, but I suspect that this would change quickly after a few dates. Others are not shy at all, specifying, for instance, "must have graduate degree or, PhD or, post doctoral. Salary - $150,000+". All most ALL of them specify a salary that they will not go below. Typically they specify a range beginning at $50,000 and then the sky's the limit. My guess is that the women that specify "Salary - Any" just want a date in hopes that they hit upon some guy that will be a little more than satisfactory. Or, they take what they can get and then when the guy turns out to fit their definition of "loser", hits the flush lever. For the sake of research, I'll have to look at the "Men seeking women" personals and see if there is even a preferred salary category for men "in search of". If there is, I'd be very interested to see if any man actually enters an amount or simply selects "Any". Like someone else said, this Dowd person lives in a Manhattan ice cave or has a shot-glass prescription of "Dowd colored glasses".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 08:10 PM January 16th, 2005 EST (#11)
|
|
|
|
|
MOMMIE - Movement of Mighty Men Inspiring Equality
Yea, Ms. Dowd, MOMMIE warned me about women like you.
Ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
by Luek on 11:44 AM January 17th, 2005 EST (#12)
|
|
|
|
|
Why is the misandrist Maureen Dowd still being taken seriously by people who should know better?
She went morally bankrupt some time ago. Just like that old 1960's fossil Germaine Greer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 08:14 AM January 18th, 2005 EST (#15)
|
|
|
|
|
Germaine Greer.
Didn't she play foot ball, then go on to star in that lousy 70's monster movie; "THE THING WITH 2 HEADS"?
...oh, no, wait. That was ROSIE Greer.
My mistake.
Well Germaine Greer could STILL star in a monster movie. (As the monster of course)
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 08:58 AM January 21st, 2005 EST (#18)
|
|
|
|
|
Maureen Dowd rocks!
You go girl!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Boy Genteel on 01:28 PM January 21st, 2005 EST (#19)
|
|
|
|
|
"Maureen Dowd rocks!
You go girl!"
Yes, you go girl. And don't come back.
bg
Men are from EARTH. Women are from EARTH. Deal with it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:20 PM January 25th, 2005 EST (#21)
|
|
|
|
|
so she's not allowed to voice her opinion as well?
I personally enjoy Dowd's columns, as I tend to share the same political views.
However, I do understand what you guys here are saying about most women wanting richer guys.
Some women ARE over the top about it; but then most just want to make sure the man they marry, date, etc. are motivated, not bums laying around the house.
But back to your comment. The girl has a right to voice her opinion. There's no need to kick her out, per se.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 07:57 PM January 25th, 2005 EST (#22)
|
|
|
|
|
pfff,.. silly girl,.. a mechanic, trucker, watever, can be much more motivated in their particular profession then a banker, lawyer or watever,..
look up clinical studies conducted by Robert Trivers et al. which show that women value financial prospects about twice as highly as men do, having higher standards regarding financial prospects at all stages of a relationship,.. and motivation does not necessarily go hand in hand with financial potential
i personally am a student who will graduate as a medical professional in a couple of years,.. do you think high maintenance bitches top my list for marriage potential? hell no,.. here i am just cutting it on loans, and memorizing friken pharmacological mechanisms while they're attending yuppie cocktail parties looking to 'cash out',.. those kinds deserve to get fucked then kicked to the curb like the whores they are,..
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
