or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Social Life, Food & Drink, Travel › Have Men become wussies around women?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Have Men become wussies around women? - Page 5

post #61 of 73
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian SD
It all relates to what you place importance on. Sometimes a "nice guy" can be extremely straightforward and level-headed about a relationship.

For some guys (sounds like Soph falls into this camp) the idea of love / mating is played out as a game. The hunt, the victory, etc.

For myself, a lover is more like a best friend. Thus, I'm very nice and agreeable and I'd do lots for my lady friend, but I'm certainly no doormat. The longest lasting relationships operate upon a 50/50 equality ideology.

For others, love is all about the passion and the immediate gratification.

The six types of love are Agape (hopeless, used, desparate), Storge (friendship), Eros (passionate, burn out quickly), Pragma (practicality.. I.e. "I wouldn't date someone unless our family genes would mix well), Mania (obsessive/posessive, hyper-jealous), and Ludus (love's a game). It would be impossible to find an agreeable ground between the different types. I believe most people are a combination of the above types, with one that is specifically higher.


----Hmm. I would definitly fully admit that I fall into the Eros than Storge if we have alot of common interets and enjoy things outside of euphoric initial 2 months partying, dining, drinking, occassional smoking and pure physical rush. It's like a drug and we've all experienced it. Endorphins, but it does make you feel alive. Nature's Drug? Life is a game to much an extent though. There is nothing like the chase of a beautiful girl whether you win or lose the chase is half the fun.
post #62 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soph
It's like a drug and we've all experienced it. Endorphins, but it does make you feel alive. Nature's Drug? Life is a game to much an extent though. There is nothing like the chase of a beautiful girl whether you win or lose the chase is half the fun.
ooohh--ohhhhh, catch that buzz
Love is the Drug that I'm thinkin' of...
ooohh-ohhhhh, can't ya see,
Love is the Drug for me....
-- Bryan Ferry, the man once known as the James Bond of music (or its Don Wannabe).
post #63 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by RJman
It's interesting, Soph. In the novel Goldfinger, written in the mid-1950s, or nearly ten years before the movie came out, Fleming has the book Bond think the same thing: men have become weaklings and pansies, and women have become confused almost-men, all because.... women had received the right to vote a generation or so before. So there's the solution to your dilemma. And yet, Fleming's image of Bond, the last real Clubland Hero, looked like a dilettantish young David Niven -- he commissioned his own artist to draw a rendition for the Bond comic strip which ran in the early 1960s. Debonair, effete, dour. It was refused as too pre-war, and a brawny, sanguine Bond was drawn instead. One who looked much more like Connery, whom Fleming called a "lorry driver hired to fuck up my character". There's a conflict in there between Fleming's chauvinistic, aggressive literary creation and the more effete image he had of his creation. Perhaps he would have found the movie Bond too effete too, in some way. He detested what the film Dr No did to Bond, but cunningly wrote his later novels to suit, so he thought, the movie Bond, according to Fleming's biographer Andrew Lycett.
That is what makes a character complicated-like the later Bogarde and Peter Lorre characters or something Crispin Glover. Or perhaps:
post #64 of 73
As women govern the social everwhere, then to be sociable it means to follow rules set by and enforced by women. For example, prisons lack women setting the rules, so men make wussies out of other men--use your imagination. Perhaps, the only thing worse than being a wussy around women, is to not have women around.
post #65 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by LabelKing
That is what makes a character complicated-like the later Bogarde and Peter Lorre characters or something Crispin Glover.

Or perhaps:

That's Bruce Glover, Crispin's dad -- or did you know that? The Wint and Kidd characters were a bit overdone, but so was the rest of the movie. Bit of a favorite, actually -- enjoyably campy and Jill St John at her most pulpous.
post #66 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by RJman
That's Bruce Glover, Crispin's dad -- or did you know that? The Wint and Kidd characters were a bit overdone, but so was the rest of the movie. Bit of a favorite, actually -- enjoyably campy and Jill St John at her most pulpous.
Of course, which is why I included Crispin Glover in my list. My favorite was the cologne bottle, very fey, and yet chic.
post #67 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by LabelKing
Of course, which is why I included Crispin Glover in my list. My favorite was the cologne bottle, very fey, and yet chic.
"Miss Case is very attractive... for a woman."
post #68 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by RJman
"Miss Case is very attractive... for a woman."
Mr.Wint and Mr.Kidd are like a less complex version of Dean Stockwell's Ben.
post #69 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by Get Smart
The wussiest men are those who grew up forced to pee sitting down. Some reason there is usually a direct correlation between the two

You need to watch Curb Your Enthusiasm. "Do you realize how much reading I get done while you're busy pissing all over your shoes?!"
post #70 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by matadorpoeta
slightly off topic:

i have never been married, and the way i have seen my friends change after marriage really makes me think it's not for me.

they have all become slaves to their wives' desires, and especially when it comes to big decisions (where to live, when to get married, when to buy a house, etc...), i feel that they are living their wives' lives, not their own.

i can say this about every married friend i have. this not as true, however, for the older married men i know, though it still applies somewhat.

{Broad generalization Disclaimer}

What I see happening is that women are marrying the children they want to have. Yes, they are marrying to have children, but they are also marrying the child. From the moment of the engagement, they treat the husband like their child. They make the decisions, pick the clothes, handle the money, do _everything_. The man, usually a wimp who has been in search of a mommy since he left home, who was never trained to rise to the call of manhood, responds to this as a comfortable alternative to being The Man. His mother never raised him to be a man, but, instead, programmed him to be a prepetual child, usually to sustain her own needs to be forever a mommy. These pathetic males become the passive recipient of the whims, good and bad, of their surragate mommies, their wives.

The women love this, it empowers them; what is more powerful than being The Mommy? The men love it. It is easy, it is the path of least resistance. They are Peter Pan, they never have to grow up. Just go to the cube farm and bring the check home to mommy. But they are at the mercy of Her whim. They are wusses. For the first few years of marriage, the couple is a perfect, disfunctional fit and life is beautiful.

Then, usually at the woman's demand, a baby appears. A real baby. Now the woman suddenly understands what it is to be a real mother. Everything changes. In the context of her new reality, her wussy husband is really useless. In fact, he is a problem. He is just another kid to take care of. She is suddenly a "single mother of two." He might have been a good practice baby, but now it's for real. He offers none of the requisite qualities of a Father; in fact, he is simply one more demanding child who is distracting her from her new found primary concern, the real baby.

So her solution is to get him out of her life, but to keep the income stream. And that's how it usually goes down. (Even if she doesn't divorce him, he becomes so subornited to the "child culture" that any manly qualities he might have ever been able to offer are for ever smothered in the avalanche of "for the children.")

These men, rejected by "mommy," have learned to hate women in general. The women, let down by their "men," become cynical about men in general (even though they have never really known one), and turn to the Collective for support. Furthermore, these women tend to prolong and encourage the "childhood" of their children because, without a husband, they become overly focused on their role as mommy. Thus, they raise the next generation of boys who will step into the role of wusses and "child husbands." And they redirect the entire ethos from a progressive healthy society and economy into sort of a "Lord of the Flies" with a mommy in which child tyrrants call all the shots both at home and in restaurants, etc.

This whole process, which seems to be escalating at an ever increasing rate, will be the end of the capitalistic system as "families" (divorced mothers with children) turn more and more to the Collective for emotional and financial support.
post #71 of 73
post #72 of 73
yeah. modern "man" is a pussified version of what we once were. years of brainwashing has led us to believe that women are our equals, which they arent.

Thats why women are always complaining about men never taking the lead. THEY WANT TO FOLLOW US. its the truth guys. That doesnt mean controlling her, because you cant rule a woman with an iron fist, no way...but you can manipulate her into doing as you please and she will like doing it as well.

I could go on but i have a feeling none of you will listen.
post #73 of 73
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smooth Genes
yeah. modern "man" is a pussified version of what we once were. years of brainwashing has led us to believe that women are our equals, which they arent.

Thats why women are always complaining about men never taking the lead. THEY WANT TO FOLLOW US. its the truth guys. That doesnt mean controlling her, because you cant rule a woman with an iron fist, no way...but you can manipulate her into doing as you please and she will like doing it as well.

I could go on but i have a feeling none of you will listen.

--- Actually I would tend to agree. Hence why men pick up the girl, decide where to go (women uniamously hate to have to plan/decide as that's a man's job), defend her honor, open the door, pay for entertainment, etc. I rarely see this not the case, as if it were, then women would be equal to these tasks which I don't see happening ever on a majority basis.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Social Life, Food & Drink, Travel › Have Men become wussies around women?