Women, and Why Men are the Problem
-
@AltarandThrone
-
@AltarandThrone the reason men and women don’t understand each other is that men are always assuming that any conflict is a direct response to whatever and only whatever happened before it. In actuality it is usually a trend that has been building and the incident that triggered the grievance is just the straw that broke the camel’s back. This is why women’s reactions can seem out of proportion to the situation. It’s the difference between linear and holistic thinking. I’m not sure what this heart nonsense means. I think it’s the other way around, the man needs to feel emotionally safe while the woman needs to feel physically safe as each are in the realm of the other.
-
@Carrot-Smith I definitely agree with your description of how men and women think, I just opted not to write the whole book, lol.
The heart is where mind, intentions, emotions, etc, reside... maybe it's language others aren't used to.
I don't intend to over complicate it. Women often do have higher "emotional IQ" than men, and I don't think it's ok for a woman to be rude, etc. Men can be very sensitive emotionally, and need respectful language from a woman. I refer all to "Keep Your Love On" by Danny Silk, for boundaries and communicating needs in a way that respects the other person, as well as yourself.
I don't think that means, however, that the man in a relationship shouldn't search out her wants and needs -- to take notice and ownership of something such as "the trend that has been building the grievance."Leaders take responsibility, even when something isn't their fault. Leaders are supposed to be humble. Taking responsibility of a relationship with a woman, will force a man to be humble, lol.
I should add: cases I see where men aren't emotionally safe and confident with a woman in her realm of strength, were often abused, or not shown affection as children, by their parents.
-
The first, best, and most suitable place for the woman is in the family, and her most glorious duty is to give children to her people and nation, children who can continue the line of generations and who guarantee the immortality of the nation. The woman is the teacher of the youth, and therefore the builder of the foundation of the future. If the family is the nation’s source of strength, the woman is its core and center. The best place for the woman to serve her people is in her marriage, in the family, in motherhood. This is her highest mission. That does not mean that those women who are employed or who have no children have no role in the motherhood of the German people. They use their strength, their abilities, their sense of responsibility for the nation, in other ways. We are convinced, however, that the first task of a socially reformed nation must be to again give the woman the possibility to fulfill her real task, her mission in the family and as a mother. - Joseph Goebbels - 1933.
Put yourself on fire for peak energy metabolism.
Ignore, judge, overcommit.
-
@Norwegian-Mugabe said in Women, and Why Men are the Problem:
The first, best, and most suitable place for the woman is in the family, and her most glorious duty is to give children to her people and nation, children who can continue the line of generations and who guarantee the immortality of the nation. The woman is the teacher of the youth, and therefore the builder of the foundation of the future. If the family is the nation’s source of strength, the woman is its core and center. The best place for the woman to serve her people is in her marriage, in the family, in motherhood. This is her highest mission. That does not mean that those women who are employed or who have no children have no role in the motherhood of the German people. They use their strength, their abilities, their sense of responsibility for the nation, in other ways. We are convinced, however, that the first task of a socially reformed nation must be to again give the woman the possibility to fulfill her real task, her mission in the family and as a mother. - Joseph Goebbels - 1933.
"The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world."
-
@S-Holmes Kinder, KĂĽche, Kirche.
Genesis 3:20: The man called his wife’s name Eve, because she was the mother of all living.
-
Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing. Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church: For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church. Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband.
Ephesians 5:22-33
-
@Norwegian-Mugabe said in Women, and Why Men are the Problem:
Joseph Goebbels
Because of the iron will of organized humanity under the command of Stalin this ugly bird looking ass - the anti-Peat crowd like you would say: dysgenic - murdered his six children with his wife! Trad!
(Stalin is 3 years older here) -
You are a retarded slave
-
@Cristiano said in Women, and Why Men are the Problem:
@AltarandThrone I am happy to be the first one to say that this is a weird bellyaching load of word salad.
@eugene said in Women, and Why Men are the Problem:
You are a retarded slave
Your comments have made my day, always keep your serotonin low, it feels good to laugh like that. Nice username by the way Cristiano.
Regarding the subject, it's not a matter of being a man or woman, it's a matter of how much love, joy and excitement you feel and express on a daily basis through a functionnal body and mind. The rest is only illusions that distract us from being who we really are, including those useless gender conflict that stems from a lack of self love and self acknowledgment.
-
@A-Former-User said in Women, and Why Men are the Problem:
If a man decided his wife’s heart was as beautiful as her body, and he would explore it with the same passion and violence as all his other hobbies
What does it mean to explore someone's heart with violence? And why would anyone want that done to them?
-
I ilovethesea referenced this topic on
-
@questforhealth said in New "Mission" of RPF:
can you explain
what you mean when you say men are 'spiritually homosexual'
im interested in this. i read last night about how jesus in the bible is apparently feminised and androgynous vs the real jesus
but at the same time he treated women equally and stuff.. broke rules... did what he wanted
@questforhealth I don’t want to trigger the incels here but the person who originally wrote this post gets it. I’m going to refer to white men here and I believe the source of their spiritual homosexuality is Christianity. We’ve been living under middle eastern patriarchal religious rule for so long that nobody realizes how sick our society really is. Before forced conversions to Christianity women were revered for their wisdom and moral leadership. Now we have an epidemic of misogynistic men who honestly believe that women have no value other than reproduction. They tell their “just so” stories about women being childlike, stupid, emotional, etc. Thats spiritual homosexuality.
-
@ilovethesea This is historically illiterate take.
-
Perhaps contemporarily as well. The (genuinely) misogynistic types are few and far between in reality. It doesn't seem fair to frame an "epidemic". But the internet is both a lens and a prism depending on viewing angle.
-
@ThinPicking Indeed. But, at the same time, if you push pendulum far enough it will swing back; after decades of feminization people are becoming more and more misogynistic as a, rightful, reaction. So "misogynistic types" will be grow in numbers and @ilovethesea implying that women should be "revered for their wisdom and moral leadership" does not help with it - it's what got us here in the first place.
More than all, there is nothing more disgusting than female intellectual pride since it's what lead Eve to talk with the snake. Anyone with appreciation for beauty will recoil at such unabashed and grotesque statements about female "wisdom and moral leadership". It reminds me of Landshark's post "Men who appear to hate women merely hate promiscuity, because they love chastity and temperance", so women acting with restraint (in speech most importantly) is an essential step to fix the issue.
-
Most guys take women way too seriously. They are beautiful little retards and I love them for that.
-
Excellent. And thank you for the laugh chap. I prefer to be seen that way in kind, most of the time at least.
@zawisza not ignoring. I read it. All valid. Excellent continuance. I've just hit a verbosity wall. Gotta sleep.
-
@zawisza I didn’t imply any such thing. But I can see you missed my point completely. That women were historically consulted on moral matters in ancient times has absolutely nothing to do with modern “female intellectual pride” whatever that is.
@ThinPicking I wouldn’t be so sure about that, just look at the trans movement for but one example.
@onliest likewise!
-
@ilovethesea said in Women, and Why Men are the Problem:
Before forced conversions to Christianity women were revered for their wisdom and moral leadership.
The idea that pagans revered women more than Christians is wrong with exceptions being pagan oracles/shamans but that's hardly the kind of "reverence" that's in the question and it's similar to the role some Christian nuns played.
Truth is that:
pagans commemorated their own moms at twice the rate they commemorated their own dads
christians commemorated their own moms at four times the rate they commemorated their own dads
christians loved their moms more than pagans.
From: https://twitter.com/lymanstoneky/status/1780598601389154632
Based on: https://prism.ucalgary.ca/server/api/core/bitstreams/aa20d671-ac23-48bb-96eb-1538fc7de9dc/contentAnd:
More generally, women at all stages of life seemed to be treated very badly—starting from birth:
"But when a girl was born, the grandparents stopped thinking about her as soon as she was baptized. They did not even express any sorrow about her death. The young father, too, did not feel much regret over it."
"If the first child is a girl, the feeling in the family is mostly one of disappointment. One of the women might remark: “Oh well, at least she can be a nursemaid.” By the following day, no one gives a thought to the baby girl."
This quote is from book about russian peasantry from c. 1900 so one may argue that they were Orthodox, however, as mentioned in the book, they had little regard for religion and practically were atheist/pagan. In fact, most European peasants, both men and women, treated women terribly for most of the history. The only exception were places were Christian faith had strong roots in the community.
Even when women's role is reduced to childbirth and rearing it's still considered to be of much greater value in Chrisitan society than it ever was among pagans in most of the Western world.
-
@ilovethesea said in Women, and Why Men are the Problem:
@ThinPicking I wouldn’t be so sure about that, just look at the trans movement for but one example.
Seems fair to bring this up. It is inherently a kind of desecration of the ends of our condition. And probably is more problematic for women than for us. There's just only so much attention I can pay to so many things.
In the old/bad place I came upon testimony from a psychologist who described it a (currently) mistreated disorder of the sense of self. And found myself inclined to agree. Particularly in the context of the "information age", energy deficits and macroeconomic trickery. But I must add, I don't know. And lack the time to make it my lane. Constructive conversation needs to be had somewhere.
Meanwhile. There's probably a Marxian trick in letting this run to extremes and muddying the discourse. But again I must add, I don't know.
It's probably more complex than a frame of "misogyny" could hold while it's hashed out. But again and more enthusiastically. Maybe I'm wrong about that. Maybe this should be kept simple. You tell us (rhetorical).
