The war on men

[merithyn]

Just go on forums where there are a lot of young men around. Let your mind be blown on the number of young boys and young men feel exactly like that - and how pathetic the help is.

Women are not the only one afraid of being used and have their feelings hurt when they commit.

That is a very different experience than I've had. Most of the young men that I know don't really care how many men their girls have been with before so long as when she commits to him, that's where her heart stays. Having been with multiple partners does not mean that she's going to walk out faster than a woman who was a virgin when you met her, and most intelligent young men know this, just as most intelligent young women know the same when it comes to men. As Valmy said, it's a different set of standards.

If it's a fear of comparison, well, that, to me, is indicative of an insecurity that has nothing to do with the woman and everything to do with the man insisting on inexperience. This is yet another reason I take issue with the concept of women being used goods. I don't think that's it at all, at least for you. (derspeiss has a different moral code, so he's not included in this.) I think you're afraid of being compared to others and being found wanting. It's a valid fear, and fits with the above post that you think men are worried about committment, etc. But it's not really fair to blame the woman because of your fears.

[garbon]

The primary impact is it encourages women to lie about the number of people they slept with which is pretty harmless I guess.

But also pretty silly and not the recipe for a relationship that will have open and honest communication.

[merithyn]

I sorta believe in the infamous double standard, just maybe not the extreme application of it.

Damnit, derspeiss. You had me, and then you lost me.

[Malthus]

I'm not getting married, ever, because in the end what difference does it make?

My girfriend is literally harassing me to ask her in marriage, and the mere fact that she does and insists pushes me even further from the idea, because for her she wants to parade around her husband. She wants to stake her claim, and it turns me off from the idea.

Other main reasons are:

A) There's no social expectation to marry anymore. I won't get shunned by society because I live in concubinage and commit fornication with my girlfriend. Living as live-in partners is the same as married life, and if it doesn't work there's no silly red-tape about divorce.

B) There is no real, significant economic benefits for men to marry, and most men have a lot to lose financially if (or when) the marriage breaks.

C) It is simply not alluring anymore. Let's not kid ourselves: marriages nowadays seldom not last unto death do us apart unless you marry in your 80s. It lasts until one gets fed up with the partner and leaves or finds better, just like in concubinage. No-fault divorce basically killed the meaning of marriage, and a lot of us saw how ours parents fared during their own marriages when we were kids.

D) Commitment is the same, whether you are married or not. The main problem is not men do not want to commit, but both men and women do not want to commit on the same terms, or the same age.

E) Whether we like it or not, both genders have become incredibly cynical about the dating game and each other's stereotype of playing it. Playas' and hoes' YOLO lifestyle is put on a piedestal, and these people only consider "settling down" when they are done playing the field or their beauty fades and the biological clock starts ticking. People still act like retarded teenagers and work McJobs to be able to afford life, well in their 20s. Adulthood now starts in the early thirties, and usually people look to settle down around this age as well.

That said, that Foxnews woman is all but asking women to turn the clock 100 years back, shut up, go back to the kitchen, and smile so that "the man" be happy.  Her text is not about the war on men, but her war on modern women.

I never really understood why it mattered so much to some men to not get married. My middle brother was the same way - he lived with his last GF for a solid decade, adamantly refusing to get married "on principle" despite her requests ... then they split up: she wanted to move to the US to pursue her carreer, he wanted to stay in the UK.

The next woman he met, he married within a year.

Then I figured it out - no matter what his lips had been *saying* about his "principled reasons" for not wanting to marry woman A, his real motivations were ... he just did not want to actually commit to her. He was willing to drift along, he was comfortable enough, but in the back of his mind there were reservations - maybe he'd meet someone better.

When he did in fact meet someone better (after he broke up with the first one), he was willing enough to forget all about his "principled reasons" why marriage was such a bad idea, and get married.

And this, in fact, is why (for some) marriage is important - it is symbolic of actually making a real commitment. The fact that divorce has negative effects on one's financials simply underlines the significance of the committment made.

Sure, it may not really last. But the adamant refusal to marry "on principle" even if the other person really wants it seems, in some cases, to simply represent mental reservations by one party about the other. This is deeply discouraging to women who are interested in having children in particular, as stability of family life is a desireable factor for having children.

Make no mistake: you may have no reservations whatsoever about your partner. I make no statement about that. But stern refusal to marry where the other person is requesting it surely is putting doubts in her mind - I know it would in mine.

[merithyn]

The primary impact is it encourages women to lie about the number of people they slept with which is pretty harmless I guess.

But also pretty silly and not the recipe for a relationship that will have open and honest communication.

It's okay. What's going to end up happening is that men with this double-standard are going to end up single since it's going to be harder and harder to find "pure" women to commit to. Then, more articles like this are going to come out explaining how it's all the women's fault for not keeping their legs crossed like good little girls. 

[derspiess]

I sorta believe in the infamous double standard, just maybe not the extreme application of it.

Damnit, derspeiss. You had me, and then you lost me.

I know.  You kept trying to give me a way out & I didn't take it.  Sorry

[Malthus]

Just go on forums where there are a lot of young men around. Let your mind be blown on the number of young boys and young men feel exactly like that - and how pathetic the help is.

Women are not the only one afraid of being used and have their feelings hurt when they commit.

That is a very different experience than I've had. Most of the young men that I know don't really care how many men their girls have been with before so long as when she commits to him, that's where her heart stays. Having been with multiple partners does not mean that she's going to walk out faster than a woman who was a virgin when you met her, and most intelligent young men know this, just as most intelligent young women know the same when it comes to men. As Valmy said, it's a different set of standards.

If it's a fear of comparison, well, that, to me, is indicative of an insecurity that has nothing to do with the woman and everything to do with the man insisting on inexperience. This is yet another reason I take issue with the concept of women being used goods. I don't think that's it at all, at least for you. (derspeiss has a different moral code, so he's not included in this.) I think you're afraid of being compared to others and being found wanting. It's a valid fear, and fits with the above post that you think men are worried about committment, etc. But it's not really fair to blame the woman because of your fears.

Gotta go with Meri on this one.

Maybe it's a class/social/urban thing. Purely in practical terms, by the time I met girls of university age or older, I simply assumed most if not all of them had multiple sexual experiences. If I wanted to meet only virgins, that would have reduced my dating pool to ... well, a small number indeed. 

[HVC]

the definition of slut also varies between people. What might be considered a unacceptable number of partners by one doesn't carry over to another.

[merithyn]

I know.  You kept trying to give me a way out & I didn't take it.  Sorry

The odd thing is that I don't really know if you truly feel that way or are just trolling me. A really big part of me wants to believe that you're trolling, but there's enough left saying, "Nope, he's really that afraid of losing his edge as primus genus."

[derspiess]

If I wanted to meet only virgins, that would have reduced my dating pool to ... well, a small number indeed. 

My oldest brother did just that.  What he ended up with was-- not optimal.  And the marriage didn't last. 

But simply avoiding sluts doesn't necessarily mean you're limiting yourself to virgins.

[merithyn]

the definition of slut also varies between people. What might be considered a unacceptable number of partners by one doesn't carry over to another.

We've had polls on this before. I think the general consensus was something along the lines of 0-5 partners was acceptable, but more than that started to become an issue for some people.

[derspiess]

The odd thing is that I don't really know if you truly feel that way or are just trolling me. A really big part of me wants to believe that you're trolling, but there's enough left saying, "Nope, he's really that afraid of losing his edge as primus genus."

Not trolling.  But not afraid of whatever the other thing is, either.

I just think there are naturally some somewhat different standards for men & women.  Men may benefit from this, but there are other double standards that benefit women. 

[Drakken]

That is a very different experience than I've had. Most of the young men that I know don't really care how many men their girls have been with before so long as when she commits to him, that's where her heart stays. Having been with multiple partners does not mean that she's going to walk out faster than a woman who was a virgin when you met her, and most intelligent young men know this, just as most intelligent young women know the same when it comes to men. As Valmy said, it's a different set of standards.

If it's a fear of comparison, well, that, to me, is indicative of an insecurity that has nothing to do with the woman and everything to do with the man insisting on inexperience. This is yet another reason I take issue with the concept of women being used goods. I don't think that's it at all, at least for you. (derspeiss has a different moral code, so he's not included in this.) I think you're afraid of being compared to others and being found wanting. It's a valid fear, and fits with the above post that you think men are worried about committment, etc. But it's not really fair to blame the woman because of your fears.

I find it funny, on how every time you and I disagree ultimately on something gender-related, in the end you use psycho-babbling as a thinly-veiled ad hominem attack to rob yourself. You systematically refuse to acknowledge the other person's point of view as legit when it doesn't suit you, but on the contrary you turn it personal it, as a problem of personal issue, rather than taking a mere counter-argument to what you perceive ought-to be right, as if I can't or wouldn't counter anything to that.

I give you, as a man, from experience, fears some men have spoken or expressed in my presence, an input that doesn't compute with your fairy-tale world. You and I disagree, I can live with that. I don't sugarcoat things for you, I don't white knight you because you are a woman. I had, until this moment, treated with a healthy dose of respect even if I rarely agree with you, and I find some of your positions questionable (as you do with some of mine).

And the argument you present after this is, if I disagree, it must be because there's an insecurity, a fear, something lacking in me? Not only it is a smack in my face, not only it is insulting and galling that you presume things, and dare to play a pseudo Dr. Phil as a tool of debate. It is quite hypocritical, from someone who chime on how double-standards are evil, to passive-agressively hide under the double-standard to attack a man's ego because you expect it will shut him off, that because a man brings in something coming from an emotional point of view that doesn't chime with your prejudices and your already made conclusions, it must be because of something problematic in himself.

I call you on this, publicly. I call you on this, because it's an habit of yours that I have noted in several threads in which you are invested in, and nobody has called you on this. It makes it extremely unpleasant to debate seriously with you on gender-related issues. From now on, I refuse to argue anymore with you.

On that note, it is my last post on this thread. Enjoy ignoring what is the madonna-whore complex, girl. God knows the rest of the world knows what it is. 

[Ed Anger]

FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT!

[garbon]

Seriously, he's going to say all that and then throw in the towel?