Post Archive

Region: The Confederacy of Free Nations

History

Magnatronia wrote:We should all put aside our differences and work together

...to nuke Aldaur.

This would be one of the only times I would side with a capitalist paradise.

Nuremgard, The Royal Republic Of Kumania, Jaslandia, Aldaur

Aldaur wrote:Masculine heterosexual men and feminine heterosexual women.

It should be noted that what isn't normal does not equate with being bad. Homosexuals for example are not normal because they only make up 3% of the population (in the US). Therefore, they are not in the norm. If things like homosexuality or gender dysphoria were normal, they would never have been seen as problems or something worth fighting for in the first place.

What about feminine men and masculine women? Again no normal.

Minnesota Dakota wrote:What about feminine men and masculine women? Again no normal.

They clearly need to be given over to psychiatrists and shock therapy until they're "normal."

Jaslandia, Aldaur, Minnesota Dakota

Nuremgard wrote:They clearly need to be given over to psychiatrists and shock therapy until they're "normal."

Sounds like Mike Pence. #DUMPTHETRUMP

Nuremgard, Jaslandia, Aldaur

Sulania wrote:I mean, claiming to know the personal thoughts and feelings of every heterosexual man/woman is kinda arrogant, especially when you highlight it with the idea that they just won't admit it.

Oh? What stuff? Do share.

It is known through what people say is important and what they value. They may not explicitly say it, but if women say, I want a man that has blank traits, and all those traits are a part of masculinity, then it can be inferred they want a masculine man even if they say they don't. The same for vice versa.

Homosexuals can sort their own archetypes and social roles. I am not homosexual, so I don't care what they decide.

The Royal Republic Of Kumania wrote:I'm unhappy that you think that since I'm a heterosexual male that I should be prioritizing having rock hard abs and being a family man instead of tryna have the most fantastic spectacular wondrous majestic soft amazing fluffy hair to ever exist.

You're clearly not reading anything I said about physical outlook and how it relates to masculinity.

I like girls who can do things for themselves. I ain't about all that being dependent on me bullsh!t. I like someone who cares and is clingy but I want someone who can survive on her own and be independent. I already got myself to worry about I don't want other people depending on me what kind of bullsh!t is that I didn't ask for all that responsibility smh.

Nuremgard, Jaslandia

There are more black people on earth than white people. Being white is not normal. Being white is wrong.

The Royal Republic Of Kumania

Nuremgard wrote:They clearly need to be given over to psychiatrists and shock therapy until they're "normal."

Positive and negative reinforcement could work too.

Aldaur

Aldaur wrote:It is known through what people say is important and what they value. They may not explicitly say it, but if women say, I want a man that has blank traits, and all those traits are a part of masculinity, then it can be inferred they want a masculine man even if they say they don't. The same for vice versa.

Homosexuals can sort their own archetypes and social roles. I am not homosexual, so I don't care what they decide.

You're clearly not reading anything I said about physical outlook and how it relates to masculinity.

Masculinity varies from culture to culture. It's relative. Same with beauty.

Jaslandia

Aldaur wrote:It is known through what people say is important and what they value. They may not explicitly say it, but if women say, I want a man that has blank traits, and all those traits are a part of masculinity, then it can be inferred they want a masculine man even if they say they don't. The same for vice versa.

Homosexuals can sort their own archetypes and social roles. I am not homosexual, so I don't care what they decide.

You're clearly not reading anything I said about physical outlook and how it relates to masculinity.

One woman doesn't decide what all women like.

Jaslandia

The Cross And Davids Star wrote:Positive and negative reinforcement could work too.

Yes, honey.

The Royal Republic Of Kumania wrote:I like girls who can do things for themselves. I ain't about all that being dependent on me bullsh!t. I like someone who cares and is clingy but I want someone who can survive on her own and be independent. I already got myself to worry about I don't want other people depending on me what kind of bullsh!t is that I didn't ask for all that responsibility smh.

I like Tim.

The Cross And Davids Star wrote:Positive and negative reinforcement could work too.

I mean, from a certain standpoint.

Of course, then there is that case of it being morally inexcusable for that.

Nuremgard wrote:They clearly need to be given over to psychiatrists and shock therapy until they're "normal."

Unnecessary. Their unhappiness is punishment enough.

Minnesota Dakota wrote:Sounds like Mike Pence. #DUMPTHETRUMP

Mike "Like cocks? Get eletric shocks" Pence? Lol

Aldaur wrote:Unnecessary. Their unhappiness is punishment enough.

Let it be known that upon the 12th day of the first month of the new year, Aldaur did completely and utterly derive without evidence that all people not like him must be completely unhappy.

Congratulations people we're a rung up from hating each other because we're different, instead, we just look down at others and sneer.

Sure feels like progress to me :/

Nuremgard, Aldaur

Damn. Every time I comment, 2 more responses. Give me time people :p

The Royal Republic Of Kumania wrote:I like girls who can do things for themselves. I ain't about all that being dependent on me bullsh!t. I like someone who cares and is clingy but I want someone who can survive on her own and be independent. I already got myself to worry about I don't want other people depending on me what kind of bullsh!t is that I didn't ask for all that responsibility smh.

And that is why most women won't want you. Not because you're a terrible person or anything, but it is in feminine nature to look for a man that can provide.

Nuremgard wrote:Masculinity varies from culture to culture. It's relative. Same with beauty.

No it doesn't. What is considered to be masculine varies, but not masculinity itself.

Minnesota Dakota wrote:One woman doesn't decide what all women like.

It isn't one woman. The majority of women cite these traits as desirable. This only includes women who are mature enough to grow out of the adolescent interest in bad boys.

Kalaron wrote:Let it be known that upon the 12th day of the first month of the new year, Aldaur did completely and utterly derive without evidence that all people not like him must be completely unhappy.

Congratulations people we're a rung up from hating each other because we're different, instead, we just look down at others and sneer.

Sure feels like progress to me :/

Damn right.

Kalaron wrote:Let it be known that upon the 12th day of the first month of the new year, Aldaur did completely and utterly derive without evidence that all people not like him must be completely unhappy.

Congratulations people we're a rung up from hating each other because we're different, instead, we just look down at others and sneer.

Sure feels like progress to me :/

Whatever helps people feel superior and sleep at night.

Aldaur, Kalaron

Kalaron wrote:I like Tim.

I like Jaime.

Aldaur, Kalaron

Sulania wrote:I like Jaime.

Lannister? Get some taste.

Aldaur

Nuremgard wrote:Whatever helps people feel superior and sleep at night.

There is merit in the idea of superiority.

Sulania wrote:I like Jaime.

#Tywin

Aldaur wrote:There is merit in the idea of superiority.

We get it. You're a social Darwinist.

Aldaur

Sulania wrote:I like Jaime.

<3

Nuremgard wrote:Lannister? Get some taste.

Closer to a Portuguese King, but close enough really.

Aldaur

Nuremgard wrote:Lannister? Get some taste.

Can't tell if pun, or if he doesn't understand.

Aldaur

Nuremgard wrote:Yes, honey.

Ok... Erm... Yeahidontknowwhatkindafetishyougotbutiainttouchinitwithahundredfootpole!

Aldaur

What do any of you think Latrovia is going to do with all this pressure on his administration?

The Cross And Davids Star wrote:Ok... Erm... Yeahidontknowwhatkindafetishyougotbutiainttouchinitwithahundredfootpole!

http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/ce/cee2e2017554de6da437cb4c37dfb65be82a6da7949a56fc24e9ad41e00b84b7.jpg

Minnesota Dakota wrote:What do any of you think Latrovia is going to do with all this pressure on his administration?

I don't know. I'll wait and see.

Nuremgard wrote:We get it. You're a social Darwinist.

Well a man that can provide is better than one that cannot. An unmasculine man is not a man at all, but a boy. Only boys can take care of only themselves and are generally worthless until they come of age to manhood.

Sulania wrote:Can't tell if pun, or if he doesn't understand.

I'm just kidding. I know you're not talking about GoT.

The Cross And Davids Star wrote:Ok... Erm... Yeahidontknowwhatkindafetishyougotbutiainttouchinitwithahundredfootpole!

That's okay. I wouldn't touch you with somebody else's.

Aldaur

Minnesota Dakota wrote:What do any of you think Latrovia is going to do with all this pressure on his administration?

I mean, probably nothing.

The people can glower all they want, but as I said in my prior post, it seems he's more concerned with punishing imaginary hypocrites than with placing the democratic mandate as his highest priority...

so...

Yeah probably nothing, a poll if enough people declare a wish for it, maybe.

Aldaur wrote:Well a man that can provide is better than one that cannot. An unmasculine man is not a man at all, but a boy. Only boys can take care of only themselves and are generally worthless until they come of age to manhood.

I'm genetically worthless then since I intend to live a blissful, childless life with my future partner/husband.

Jaslandia, Aldaur

Aldaur wrote:Well a man that can provide is better than one that cannot. An unmasculine man is not a man at all, but a boy. Only boys can take care of only themselves and are generally worthless until they come of age to manhood.

What about a feminine man?

Nuremgard wrote:I'm genetically worthless then since I intend to live a blissful, childless life with my future partner/husband.

Generally* worthless.

I provide for myself and help out my family and friends when I can.

Jaslandia, Aldaur

Nuremgard wrote:I'm genetically worthless then since I intend to live a blissful, childless life with my future partner/husband.

Well technically, anyone who doesn't pass on their genes is equivalent to be genetically worthless :p That is your life to live. It is different for homosexuals I can imagine though.

Minnesota Dakota wrote:What about a feminine man?

To Aldaur, a feminine man is an unhappy degenerate. To me, he's just another human being who happens to be different in the wonderfully diverse tapestry that is humanity.

Jaslandia, Aldaur, Minnesota Dakota

Aldaur wrote:Well technically, anyone who doesn't pass on their genes is equivalent to be genetically worthless :p That is your life to live. It is different for homosexuals I can imagine though.

I personally believe homosexuality is nature's answer to population control.

Aldaur

Aldaur wrote:Well a man that can provide is better than one that cannot. An unmasculine man is not a man at all, but a boy. Only boys can take care of only themselves and are generally worthless until they come of age to manhood.

Jeez, you sound like the grumpy old hermit who lost his wife 5 years ago and now just complains about how all men are now just emasculated wimps who aren't doing anything for society, while pretending the generation before him didn't say the same about his, and while also pretending his generation provided the best for everything.

Nuremgard, The Royal Republic Of Kumania, Jaslandia, Aldaur, Kalaron, Minnesota Dakota

Nuremgard wrote:Generally* worthless.

I provide for myself and help out my family and friends when I can.

Oh, generally lol Well if you have no obligation, but you still take care of people when you can, that is masculinity.

Minnesota Dakota wrote:What about a feminine man?

Worthless. Nothing but a boy.

Aldaur wrote:Oh, generally lol Well if you have no obligation, but you still take care of people when you can, that is masculinity.

Worthless. Nothing but a boy.

Oh, I'm deemed masculine by Ald. I can sleep easier at night now.

Aldaur

Aldaur wrote:Damn. Every time I comment, 2 more responses. Give me time people :p

And that is why most women won't want you. Not because you're a terrible person or anything, but it is in feminine nature to look for a man that can provide.

No it doesn't. What is considered to be masculine varies, but not masculinity itself.

It isn't one woman. The majority of women cite these traits as desirable. This only includes women who are mature enough to grow out of the adolescent interest in bad boys.

Maybe where you come from all the women sit around waiting for their Prince Charming to come and rescue them and provide for them. But not where I live. Around here, the women are independent af. From my experience, all the girls I've encountered want to be able to provide for themselves. Except most of the Mormon girls though but that's irrelevant half of them who are dating someone get married within a year after graduating high school. But everyone else doesn't aspire to be the 1950's housewife that stays at home while the entire burden of generating income falls on the husband. Nah the girls around here wanna be engineers and doctors and stuff. They wanna contribute to society instead of having the entire burden fall on their husbands.

Nuremgard, Jaslandia, Kalaron

Aldaur wrote:Oh, generally lol Well if you have no obligation, but you still take care of people when you can, that is masculinity.

Worthless. Nothing but a boy.

What if the man provides better than a masculine man?

The Royal Republic Of Kumania wrote:Maybe where you come from all the women sit around waiting for their Prince Charming to come and rescue them and provide for them. But not where I live. Around here, the women are independent af. From my experience, all the girls I've encountered want to be able to provide for themselves. Except most of the Mormon girls though but that's irrelevant half of them who are dating someone get married within a year after graduating high school. But everyone else doesn't aspire to be the 1950's housewife that stays at home while the entire burden of generating income falls on the husband. Nah the girls around here wanna be engineers and doctors and stuff. They wanna contribute to society instead of having the entire burden fall on their husbands.

Those Mormon girls will probably end up just another number in the harem of wives their man keeps.

Nuremgard wrote:I personally believe homosexuality is nature's answer to population control.

We don't need population control. If anything, we need to having more kids, both to sustain social security and to prepare for space colonization.

Sulania wrote:Jeez, you sound like the grumpy old hermit who lost his wife 5 years ago and now just complains about how all men are now just emasculated wimps who aren't doing anything for society, while pretending the generation before him didn't say the same about his, and while also pretending his generation provided the best for everything.

No, I acknowledge my generation to be complete crap. As is the one before us, and the one before them. The hippy generation started all this sh!t.

Minnesota Dakota wrote:What do any of you think Latrovia is going to do with all this pressure on his administration?

Nothing will happen. He's a strong individual who's faced worse criticism in our old region. He'll survive.

Oelesa

The Royal Republic Of Kumania wrote:Nothing will happen. He's a strong individual who's faced worse criticism in our old region. He'll survive.

I just hope for a poll.

Oelesa

Aldaur wrote:We don't need population control.

You'd make a cracking Catholic.

Never mind those AIDS, Africans. Ald says you need to prepare for space colonisation.

Aldaur

Aldaur wrote:We don't need population control. If anything, we need to having more kids, both to sustain social security and to prepare for space colonization.

You are saying create more mouths to feed, which creates more issues ie.: over population and starvation.

Nuremgard, Oelesa

Aldaur wrote:We don't need population control. If anything, we need to having more kids, both to sustain social security and to prepare for space colonization.

No, I acknowledge my generation to be complete crap. As is the one before us, and the one before them. The hippy generation started all this sh!t.

I mean, you are a millennial. The generation that created safe spaces, the idea of political correctness, and gave a socialist jew a very strong shot at the White House.

From your perspective, I bet you see your generation as the second coming of satan.

Nuremgard, Aldaur, Oelesa, Kalaron

Democrats are asking me to march in Indianapolis against Trump. I'd bet 50 dollars there will be a "He's not my President" sign. If you live in America, he's your goddamm President! Jesus.

That said, I'll lose my sh!t if I actually go and see that crap.

The Royal Republic Of Kumania wrote:Maybe where you come from all the women sit around waiting for their Prince Charming to come and rescue them and provide for them. But not where I live. Around here, the women are independent af. From my experience, all the girls I've encountered want to be able to provide for themselves. Except most of the Mormon girls though but that's irrelevant half of them who are dating someone get married within a year after graduating high school. But everyone else doesn't aspire to be the 1950's housewife that stays at home while the entire burden of generating income falls on the husband. Nah the girls around here wanna be engineers and doctors and stuff. They wanna contribute to society instead of having the entire burden fall on their husbands.

Being feminine doesn't equate to being worthless. Even women of aspiration still want a man that can provide more than they can. It is just in their nature. No woman wants to take care of a man. Men on the otherhand are more likely to want to take care of a woman. That doesn't mean they are just pretty little housewives, but rather are partners that pull slightly more weight. Women want what they want for themselves, but they don't mind having some burdened eased. Men desire respect, and that is attained by pulling more weight. It is why men show off to women in various ways. It is an instinctual habit to show rhey can provide in some way.

Minnesota Dakota wrote:What if the man provides better than a masculine man?

Then how is he feminine?

Aldaur wrote:Being feminine doesn't equate to being worthless. Even women of aspiration still want a man that can provide more than they can. It is just in their nature. No woman wants to take care of a man. Men on the otherhand are more likely to want to take care of a woman. That doesn't mean they are just pretty little housewives, but rather are partners that pull slightly more weight. Women want what they want for themselves, but they don't mind having some burdened eased. Men desire respect, and that is attained by pulling more weight. It is why men show off to women in various ways. It is an instinctual habit to show rhey can provide in some way.

Then how is he feminine?

The generalisation is strong with this one.

Aldaur, Oelesa

Nuremgard wrote:You'd make a cracking Catholic.

Never mind those AIDS, Africans. Ald says you need to prepare for space colonisation.

Lol Africans aren't going to space, unless we decide to bring them with us. Fine, Africans can stop having children.

Minnesota Dakota wrote:You are saying create more mouths to feed, which creates more issues ie.: over population and starvation.

Yes, but more labour, which also produces economic growth, which minimizes the cost of those mouths.

Sulania wrote:I mean, you are a millennial. The generation that created safe spaces, the idea of political correctness, and gave a socialist jew a very strong shot at the White House.

From your perspective, I bet you see your generation as the second coming of satan.

Our generation isn't evil. Just retarded.

Oelesa

Aldaur wrote:Being feminine doesn't equate to being worthless. Even women of aspiration still want a man that can provide more than they can. It is just in their nature. No woman wants to take care of a man. Men on the otherhand are more likely to want to take care of a woman. That doesn't mean they are just pretty little housewives, but rather are partners that pull slightly more weight. Women want what they want for themselves, but they don't mind having some burdened eased. Men desire respect, and that is attained by pulling more weight. It is why men show off to women in various ways. It is an instinctual habit to show rhey can provide in some way.

Then how is he feminine?

How does a masculine man provide better than a feminine man?

Oelesa

Nuremgard wrote:The generalisation is strong with this one.

Generalizations and stereotypes are based on truth.

Oelesa

Aldaur wrote:Lol Africans aren't going to space, unless we decide to bring them with us. Fine, Africans can stop having children.

Yes, but more labour, which also produces economic growth, which minimizes the cost of those mouths.

Our generation isn't evil. Just retarded.

That doesn't increase food production.

Oelesa wrote:Democrats are asking me to march in Indianapolis against Trump. I'd bet 50 dollars there will be a "He's not my President" sign. If you live in America, he's your goddamm President! Jesus.

That said, I'll lose my sh!t if I actually go and see that crap.

n0

in my view my cat is our president now

praise be to the first female non-human POTUS!

Jaslandia

Aldaur wrote:Lol Africans aren't going to space, unless we decide to bring them with us. Fine, Africans can stop having children.

Yes, but more labour, which also produces economic growth, which minimizes the cost of those mouths.

Our generation isn't evil. Just retarded.

Every generation is retarded and evil. Only evil retards could come up with such things as Nazism, eugenics and religion. Humans excel at evil and retardation.

Aldaur wrote:We don't need population control. If anything, we need to having more kids, both to sustain social security and to prepare for space colonization.

Also, forgot to mention, whether we employ population control methods or not, we're eventually going to reach a point of carrying capacity where resources are going to be too constrained in the closed system of Earth. So, if you want a continuously growing population, pray to whatever God you want that space travel is more than a pipe dream.

Minnesota Dakota

Aldaur wrote:Generalizations and stereotypes are based on truth.

Truth of a few though, not everyone. That's why it's a stereotype.

Nuremgard, Aldaur, Minnesota Dakota

What an intelligent and productive debate. I'm rooting for Minnesota Dakota.

Minnesota Dakota

Aldaur wrote:Generalizations and stereotypes are based on truth.

Which means every single man desires respect. No woman wants respect. And it's just in their nature to have men earn more than them. Not a single woman ever wants to take care of a man. Except for my mum who took care of my late grandfather for over ten years after his stroke.

She must have been a degenerate mind you. After all she did deviate from the "norm" of women not wanting to support a man.

Aldaur

The Royal Republic Of Kumania wrote:n0

in my view my cat is our president now

praise be to the first female non-human POTUS!

We can put animals in the White House? I'll but my female dog Lucy in the white house. She is scared of everything but warns you when something bad is coming!

Jaslandia

Magnatronia wrote:What an intelligent and productive debate. I'm rooting for Minnesota Dakota.

Thank you

Oelesa

Minnesota Dakota wrote:How does a masculine man provide better than a feminine man?

They provide economically, they offer protection, they offer leadership, they offer devotion, they are reliable and dependable. A feminine man is not a man, but a boy that think only for themselves, rests on the laurels of real men and trick themselves into thinking that can live in some fairy tale where women and men are the same and thus can live however they wish. A masculine man, or just a man, is mature enough to realize that you can't live however you wish. That is why he can provide better.

Oelesa

Aldaur wrote:Generalizations and stereotypes are based on truth.

Yeah, but fall apart when applied to individual cases. It's called an ecological fallacy, where we apply stereotypes and generalizations, even when they are generally backed up by statistics, to individual cases. That's one of the first things you are taught when learning statistics, though granted I'm running on the assumption you have statistics to back up your arguments.

Aldaur wrote:They provide economically, they offer protection, they offer leadership, they offer devotion, they are reliable and dependable. A feminine man is not a man, but a boy that think only for themselves, rests on the laurels of real men and trick themselves into thinking that can live in some fairy tale where women and men are the same and thus can live however they wish. A masculine man, or just a man, is mature enough to realize that you can't live however you wish. That is why he can provide better.

So basically reality. Not all the bull crap about how anything is possible and you can be whatever you want.

Aldaur

Aldaur wrote:They provide economically, they offer protection, they offer leadership, they offer devotion, they are reliable and dependable. A feminine man is not a man, but a boy that think only for themselves, rests on the laurels of real men and trick themselves into thinking that can live in some fairy tale where women and men are the same and thus can live however they wish. A masculine man, or just a man, is mature enough to realize that you can't live however you wish. That is why he can provide better.

How is a feminine man not mature? A feminine man can do all those things you listed. How is a feminine man not a man?

Nuremgard wrote:Which means every single man desires respect. No woman wants respect. And it's just in their nature to have men earn more than them. Not a single woman ever wants to take care of a man. Except for my mum who took care of my late grandfather for over ten years after his stroke.

She must have been a degenerate mind you. After all she did deviate from the "norm" of women not wanting to support a man.

Your mom didn't want to take care of him, she had to or felt she should. If he didn't have a stroke and was perfectly healthy, fit and capable of having a very good job, and yet still wanted her to take care of him, she'd feel quite the resentment. I don't think any woman would want a man like that.

Oelesa

Aldaur wrote:Being feminine doesn't equate to being worthless. Even women of aspiration still want a man that can provide more than they can. It is just in their nature. No woman wants to take care of a man. Men on the otherhand are more likely to want to take care of a woman. That doesn't mean they are just pretty little housewives, but rather are partners that pull slightly more weight. Women want what they want for themselves, but they don't mind having some burdened eased. Men desire respect, and that is attained by pulling more weight. It is why men show off to women in various ways. It is an instinctual habit to show rhey can provide in some way.

Believe me I'd love to show her off and give her the world if possible. I already do a lot and put in wayyyyy more effort than others do for me. It's a habit I have that's sometimes not that great because I put in all this effort and rarely get any back in return. I guess I'm just different and prefer someone who would reflect the effort I put in, or at least half of it, since I feel like I've already done a whole lot for others. When I care for someone, I care deeply. Just ask Merlinton, Magnatronia, Aghrabia, or The Land Of Golden Blobfish. They've witnessed it firsthand. I'm one who believes that regardless of gender, it's much nicer when one gets as much in return as they give.

Merlinton, Aghrabia, Oelesa, Magnatronia

Aldaur wrote:Your mom didn't want to take care of him, she had to or felt she should. If he didn't have a stroke and was perfectly healthy, fit and capable of having a very good job, and yet still wanted her to take care of him, she'd feel quite the resentment. I don't think any woman would want a man like that.

Thank you for your insight into my mother's mind.

You are talking total and utter BS it's not even funny.

The Royal Republic Of Kumania

Minnesota Dakota wrote:How is a feminine man not mature? A feminine man can do all those things you listed. How is a feminine man not a man?

A feminine man doesn't see reality. If you are deluted, you can't provide the security people need and crave.

Oelesa wrote:So basically reality. Not all the bull crap about how anything is possible and you can be whatever you want.

Exactly.

Nuremgard wrote:Thank you for your insight into my mother's mind.

You are talking total and utter BS it's not even funny.

Who knew a stranger on the Internet could know your mom better than you

Nuremgard, Aldaur

Aldaur wrote:A feminine man doesn't see reality. If you are deluted, you can't provide the security people need and crave.

Exactly.

What is reality then?

The Royal Republic Of Kumania, Aldaur

The Royal Republic Of Kumania wrote:Who knew a stranger on the Internet could know your mom better than you

I have indeed see the light.

The Royal Republic Of Kumania, Aldaur

Minnesota Dakota wrote:What is reality then?

Woah

Sh!t got deep.

The Royal Republic Of Kumania, Minnesota Dakota

Minnesota Dakota wrote:What is reality then?

What he says it is. He's always right. He's a big burly masculine man, grr.

The Royal Republic Of Kumania, Aldaur, Minnesota Dakota

The Royal Republic Of Kumania wrote:Believe me I'd love to show her off and give her the world if possible. I already do a lot and put in wayyyyy more effort than others do for me. It's a habit I have that's sometimes not that great because I put in all this effort and rarely get any back in return. I guess I'm just different and prefer someone who would reflect the effort I put in, or at least half of it, since I feel like I've already done a whole lot for others. When I care for someone, I care deeply. Just ask Merlinton, Magnatronia, Aghrabia, or The Land Of Golden Blobfish. They've witnessed it firsthand. I'm one who believes that regardless of gender, it's much nicer when one gets as much in return as they give.

To give as much as you get in return is not as good as giving more than what you get in return. Women will pick the latter. Also, for women, this is also true. They give more than we give back, but in different capacities because men and women are different.

Nuremgard wrote:Thank you for your insight into my mother's mind.

You are talking total and utter BS it's not even funny.

You're welcome lol

It isn't BS. Just because you don't like the facts doesn't mean it isn't true. Women don't want to take care of men who are capable.

Nuremgard wrote:What he says it is. He's always right. He's a big burly masculine man, grr.

I'm glad you're getting it :p No, nature decides.

Minnesota Dakota wrote:What is reality then?

If you have to ask....

Aldaur wrote:To give as much as you get in return is not as good as giving more than what you get in return. Women will pick the latter. Also, for women, this is also true. They give more than we give back, but in different capacities because men and women are different.

You're welcome lol

It isn't BS. Just because you don't like the facts doesn't mean it isn't true. Women don't want to take care of men who are capable.

Scenario: A couple both work. The woman earns more than her husband. Both are content with this arrangement. Is the man not a real man?

The Royal Republic Of Kumania

Nuremgard wrote:Scenario: A couple both work. The woman earns more than her husband. Both are content with this arrangement. Is the man not a real man?

Does he provide in the other ways I described?

One is not just a man or not a man if they fail to provide in one of the capacities, but he is less of a man than the one that does.

Sulania wrote:Woah

Sh!t got deep.

Sul, stuff got deep because a leftist and far rightist are debating.

The Royal Republic Of Kumania, Aldaur

Aldaur wrote:I'm glad you're getting it :p No, nature decides.

If you have to ask....

Ah, the old nature argument. Nature also gave us cancer. I suppose we ought not to fight that since nature is always right.

The Royal Republic Of Kumania, Minnesota Dakota

Aldaur wrote:It isn't BS. Just because you don't like the facts doesn't mean it isn't true. Women don't want to take care of men who are capable.

Seriously, I can understand if it's your belief about that, but don't peddle your belief as the 100% truth that all woman want.

If you said "A lot of women want," I wouldn't really be arguing with you because I don't know the statistic on that nor do I care all that much, but I know just from my select female friends, which a gay white male so I have plenty more than I like, that not all of them feel this way.

Nuremgard, Aldaur

Aldaur wrote:Does he provide in the other ways I described?

One is not just a man or not a man if they fail to provide in one of the capacities, but he is less of a man than the one that does.

Scenario: a burglar breaks into the house. The woman grabs the gun and fends him off to defend her husband. Is he not a real man?

Sulania wrote:Seriously, I can understand if it's your belief about that, but don't peddle your belief as the 100% truth that all woman want.

If you said "A lot of women want," I wouldn't really be arguing with you because I don't know the statistic on that nor do I care all that much, but I know just from my select female friends, which a gay white male so I have plenty more than I like, that not all of them feel this way.

Fine, I'll concede to this. When I speak, I speak of the majority. I acknowledge that there are aberrations.

The Royal Republic Of Kumania wrote:I'm one who believes that regardless of gender, it's much nicer when one gets as much in return as they give.

On paper it's nice to get in return what you gave. In practice as humans we will fail to do that because we are naturally selfish. Simply by giving you expect something in return, which is selfish and not kindness at all. Only the goal of either gaining their approval or getting something in return.

With that we will be disappointed because of our selfishness, we are sad because we didn't get the out come we wanted.

So we fail.

Aldaur

Aldaur wrote:

It isn't BS. Just because you don't like the facts doesn't mean it isn't true. Women don't want to take care of men who are capable.

You do not know that.

Nuremgard wrote:Scenario: a burglar breaks into the house. The woman grabs the gun and fends him off to defend her husband. Is he not a real man?

Less of a man than the one that defended his wife. His wife will think that too. Most women want security and protection that is offered from their husband. She will undoubtedly think he is less a man.

Aldaur wrote:Less of a man than the one that defended his wife. His wife will think that too. Most women want security and protection that is offered from their husband. She will undoubtedly think he is less a man.

You do not know that.

Nuremgard, The Royal Republic Of Kumania

Aldaur wrote:Less of a man than the one that defended his wife. His wife will think that too. Most women want security and protection that is offered from their husband. She will undoubtedly think he is less a man.

No she wont undoubtedly think that because you don't know her mind. Is it impossible for you to think that marriage is an equal partnership in which both partners provide protection and love t one another? Protection is not a one way street coming from the man only.

In your scenario, this would happen:

There is a house fire. The baby needs saving. The woman refuses to go get it and tells her husband, "you must protect the family as you're the man. I cannot be expected to save my child from this burning building because I am a woman and am unable to provide protection to my family."

The Royal Republic Of Kumania, Minnesota Dakota

Nuremgard wrote:No she wont undoubtedly think that because you don't know her mind. Is it impossible for you to think that marriage is an equal partnership in which both partners provide protection and love t one another? Protection is not a one way street coming from the man only.

In your scenario, this would happen:

There is a house fire. The baby needs saving. The woman refuses to go get it and tells her husband, "you must protect the family as you're the man. I cannot be expected to save my child from this burning building because I am a woman and am unable to provide protection to my family."

This moral relativism is astonishing.

If the woman is in danger and has to rely on herself to defend herself, she will see her man as lesser to those that would have come to her defense.

It isn't a logical thing. Of course women can defend themselves, but they will be more inclined towards the man that can do it for them.

Aldaur wrote:This moral relativism is astonishing.

If the woman is in danger and has to rely on herself to defend herself, she will see her man as lesser to those that would have come to her defense.

It isn't a logical thing. Of course women can defend themselves, but they will be more inclined towards the man that can do it for them.

What if she has no man? What if her man is disabled? Would the disabled man be "not a man"?

The Royal Republic Of Kumania

*grabs popcorn*

The Royal Republic Of Kumania, Jaslandia, Aldaur

Minnesota Dakota wrote:What if she has no man? What if her man is disabled? Would the disabled man be "not a man"?

He would be less desirable than a fit man.

Aldaur wrote:This moral relativism is astonishing.

If the woman is in danger and has to rely on herself to defend herself, she will see her man as lesser to those that would have come to her defense.

It isn't a logical thing. Of course women can defend themselves, but they will be more inclined towards the man that can do it for them.

Let's take your argument that nature is always right and nature decided this order. You say that males are the ones who provide protection for the family. Why is it then that in many animal species, it is the females who nurture and protect their young from predators?

Consider a pride of lions. When a lioness gives birth to cubs, she must protect them not only from predators but also from the male head of the pack who may decided to kill the cubs if he does not take a liking to them.

Where is your "males provide protection" rule in this scenario from nature?

Also, let's not forget that it's the lionesses who hunt in order to feed the pride too. So logically, if we take you at your word, human males are deviating from the natural order by being the ones who must provide protection and sustenance to their families.

The Royal Republic Of Kumania

The Land Of Golden Blobfish wrote:*grabs popcorn*

*Leans over*

Is that Kettle Corn?

Also Aldaur the amount of crap you said is astonishing.

Sulania wrote:*Leans over*

Is that Kettle Corn?

ew gross, no

Aldaur wrote:This moral relativism is astonishing.

If the woman is in danger and has to rely on herself to defend herself, she will see her man as lesser to those that would have come to her defense.

It isn't a logical thing. Of course women can defend themselves, but they will be more inclined towards the man that can do it for them.

Aldaur wrote:This moral relativism is astonishing

.

Sorry, this just fits too well not too

Nuremgard wrote:Let's take your argument that nature is always right and nature decided this order. You say that males are the ones who provide protection for the family. Why is it then that in many animal species, it is the females who nurture and protect their young from predators?

Consider a pride of lions. When a lioness gives birth to cubs, she must protect them not only from predators but also from the male head of the pack who may decided to kill the cubs if he does not take a liking to them.

Where is your "males provide protection" rule in this scenario from nature?

Also, let's not forget that it's the lionesses who hunt in order to feed the pride too. So logically, if we take you at your word, human males are deviating from the natural order by being the ones who must provide protection and sustenance to their families.

You do realize that circumstances are different for species. I only speak of what is natural for humans. If I wanted to talk about other animals, I would. They are entirely irrelevant.

Assembled with Dot's Region Saver.
Written by Refuge Isle.