Jubilant Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 My sister and her husband wanted a baby together. They get pregnant and my sister miscarries and my asshole EX-Brother-in-law can't handle it and never goes to see her at the hospital and lets her grieve alone. This was over 14 years ago and they've been divorced awhile but WTGDF? IMNSHO, that is WEAK! One of my dearest friends had to have an abortion but go through full labor due to melanoma skin cancer, in order to receive radiation treatment and her husband doesn't go because he *can't handle it*, *its too hard*. Didn't even look at the picture of their dead son. Then when she has her treatments he uses the same goddamn excuse. He wasn't even with her on her deathbed, but her sister was and had to call and wake his ass in the middle of the night to come because the end was near (cancer traveled into her windpipe). These aren't the only times of heard of men acting like this, its all over the internet. I don't mean to make a generalization because I know that not all men are like this, my husband sticks by me through thick and thin and thinks men like that need to grow some balls and are total dishrags. Mostly, I'm just venting and would really like to know....who the hell made the totally FALSE observation that women are the *weaker* sex? Even physically, that is most certainly NOT always a truth. PS...Just found this out from my friends husband a couple of days ago so I'm in a fresh pissed off state of mind. This is not directed towards you strong men of ExC...unless of course you act like the guys I'm bitching about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodsmoke Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 One of my dearest friends had to have an abortion but go through full labor due to melanoma skin cancer, in order to receive radiation treatment and her husband doesn't go because he *can't handle it*, *its too hard*. Didn't even look at the picture of their dead son. Then when she has her treatments he uses the same goddamn excuse. He wasn't even with her on her deathbed, but her sister was and had to call and wake his ass in the middle of the night to come because the end was near (cancer traveled into her windpipe). This has nothing to do with your post, I'm afraid; but, um... I'm not going to be able to sleep tonight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ro-bear Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 Men generally have stronger bones and muscles...that's about it. It has been my observation that women are more emotionally resilient than men. During my younger sister's terminal illness it became clear that my mother was by far the strongest member of the family. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurari Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 It's because God threw a hissy fit when Eve couldn't resist the temptation of the serpent. Genisis 3:16: Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee. So, we're the "weaker sex." It's yet another ludicrious Biblism of our culture where we run things on "God said so" and not off of reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sage Nabooru Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 I have to agree with Ro-bear. I notice a definite yin-yang principle at work in society. Men have physical strength, women have the emotional strength. In fact I often wonder about what this world would be like if it weren't run by the testosterone half, if you know what I mean. Would there be less violent military force? Less domination and bloody knee-jerk reactions? Less fundamentalism and demanding? Less "pride"? More peacekeeping and compromise? More shared power and thoughtful actions? More tolerance and open-mindedness? More "humility"? Of course that's just wondering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilentLoner Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 I don't belive in generalizing strength. Men man tend to be stronger physically but we know its not an absolute rule. Having seen a decent share of women and men being equally emotional wrecks, I think strength mostly depends on the individual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelli Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 I would never do that kind of shit to my wife. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leftofpunk Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 Firstly I find the name of the original poster and the content of the post to be ironic and secondly it made me wanna post this pic Lastly I agree that it's really up to the individual. Of course you'd also have to define strength cuase you were posting different kinds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asimov Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 I can bench 450.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panther Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 I don't belive in generalizing strength. Men man tend to be stronger physically but we know its not an absolute rule. Having seen a decent share of women and men being equally emotional wrecks, I think strength mostly depends on the individual. Agreed....I still believe there are a lot of men out there that still "man up" when it comes to situations. Finding one, however, isn't always easy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jubilant Posted March 2, 2007 Author Share Posted March 2, 2007 Gee, I could swear in my OP that I said, "I don't mean to make generalization because I know that all men are not like that...." (stops, looks at OP, yep...its there) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jubilant Posted March 2, 2007 Author Share Posted March 2, 2007 Firstly I find the name of the original poster and the content of the post to be ironic Jubilant because I found that Christianity is a lie and am free. Lastly I agree that it's really up to the individual. Of course you'd also have to define strength cuase you were posting different kinds. I presented specific cases and it is clear what kind of *strength* to which I referred...emotional. They weren't there for their partners when they were going through horrid circumstances that affected them as married people. That you can't see that sort of has me thinking, "Eh?" As to the rest of your post...this is the Rants and Replies section and last I knew, bitching was allowed to take place here. If I've offended anyone I'm sorry, but again, when one reads further down in the OP, it is clear that I was not by any means saying "All men". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
narcissist Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 You should meet my old man. He tries to conceal his weakness behind violence or the threat thereof, 'cause, you know, men are tough and all that... Sorry to hear about your wussy-man experience Jubilant. If I could offer you my balls, I would. (What did I just say?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eponymic Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 In fact I often wonder about what this world would be like if it weren't run by the testosterone half, if you know what I mean. Would there be less violent military force? Less domination and bloody knee-jerk reactions? Less fundamentalism and demanding? Less "pride"? More peacekeeping and compromise? More shared power and thoughtful actions? More tolerance and open-mindedness? More "humility"? Actually, if you look at the history of true matriachal societies, you'll see that it is indeed the case that they are more peaceful than patriachal ruled societies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodsmoke Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 Aye. Though it can be somewhat galling to admit as a male (I personally favor a more egalitarian approach), it does seem to be true that matriarchal societies are less violent (one might argue problematic overall) than patriarchal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asimov Posted March 3, 2007 Share Posted March 3, 2007 In fact I often wonder about what this world would be like if it weren't run by the testosterone half, if you know what I mean. Would there be less violent military force? Less domination and bloody knee-jerk reactions? Less fundamentalism and demanding? Less "pride"? More peacekeeping and compromise? More shared power and thoughtful actions? More tolerance and open-mindedness? More "humility"? What? Ah, I see...because males are violent, domineering, bloody, irrational, religiously inclined, demanding, prideful, war-mongering, thoughtless, intolerant and close-minded?? Actually, if you look at the history of true matriachal societies, you'll see that it is indeed the case that they are more peaceful than patriachal ruled societies. Peaceful doesn't mean better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sage Nabooru Posted March 3, 2007 Share Posted March 3, 2007 Seriously? I'd rather live in a peaceful, harmonious society, even if it was poor or small, then a large one that's based on the idea of power and domination. I'd rather live in Bhutan than Saudi Arabia. It is historically accurate, that patriarchal societies tend more towards seeing warfare and domination as solutions, sensing cultural, religious, or racial superiority, are more likely to react with violence, be selfish in goals, and having capital punishment/torture. I think testosterone, when it's concentrated in power, can make people do some mighty assholish things. It's a natural function but I don't think always a good one. But I've had bad experiences with men, so........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godlessgrrl Posted March 4, 2007 Share Posted March 4, 2007 Hmm. Can someone give me an example of a genuinely matriarchal society? I.e., one in which women are in charge, in the same way that men are "in charge" in a patriarchy? I suspect that what folks may actually be thinking of with the term "matriarchy" is more along the lines of "matrilinear egalitarian." That is, cultures where both genders play a strong, more or less equal role in running a society, and inheritance and family names are passed down along the female line instead of the male. There are and have been a few of those, and they do seem to function with considerably less violence, both on an interpersonal and intertribal scale. I can't actually think of a genuine matriarchy, now or in the past (though if anyone can riddle me one, I'd be grateful), but I'm not convinced that true matriarchy would be any better than patriarchy. You'd still be in a position where one set of genitals ruled and owned everything, which would be as imbalanced and unequal by default as patriarchy is. Additionally, I hope no one forgets how cruel girls and women can be. I think back to the days of middle- and highschool, when the cruelest, meanest, pettiest group of students at my various schools was always a group of girls. (Think "Heathers" here.) Most of them didn't change much as time went on. I sure as fuck wouldn't want them in charge of anything. Anyway, just some thoughts... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dhampir Posted March 4, 2007 Share Posted March 4, 2007 Additionally, I hope no one forgets how cruel girls and women can be. I think back to the days of middle- and high school, when the cruelest, meanest, pettiest group of students at my various schools was always a group of girls. (Think "Heathers" here.) Most of them didn't change much as time went on. I sure as fuck wouldn't want them in charge of anything. Fuck yes. If women ruled the world, I think that indeed there'd be violence on a lower volume, but the scale would probably be even or greater. Not to mention the male resentment from a female ruled society whereby many things man would be suppressed, would result in a world that was as violent as this one. The reality is that the stewardship of the world has always been a lot more even between genders than people believe. It isn't necessarily a man's world, as the Godfather once said; men have just been at the forefront apparently, where women tended to work things behind the scenes throughout history, so the idea that women ruling the world would make it better is baseless in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sage Nabooru Posted March 4, 2007 Share Posted March 4, 2007 Oh yes, I will be the first to agree, when it comes to cattiness, pettiness, snottiness, and overall superficially-based hate (such as, omigod she's like such a loser her dad drives a fucking Honda omigod), girls take the cake over boys. I was bullied by all kinds of Heathers growing up, I was brown-haired, untanned, a little chunky and just not cool enough. I didn't wear the right jewelry or clothes. For this, they treated me as though I had no soul, emotions, feelings, anything, or if I did, they simply didn't matter. It was irrelevant as to whether or not I'd done anything to directly offend them; they'd still just walk up to me for no fucking reason and whisper some absolutely cutting and soul-eating remark about how I wasn't worth shit and they were glad my parents beat me because I was so ugly I deserved it and how I'd never be one of them and why don't I just kill myself already. I think yin-yang is really a good picture of female-male. Men are active, when they're bullies they beat the shit out of each other physically. Women are emotion-based and take cold-daggered stabs at the very heart with words and gestures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilentLoner Posted March 5, 2007 Share Posted March 5, 2007 Hmm. Can someone give me an example of a genuinely matriarchal society? I.e., one in which women are in charge, in the same way that men are "in charge" in a patriarchy? I suspect that what folks may actually be thinking of with the term "matriarchy" is more along the lines of "matrilinear egalitarian." That is, cultures where both genders play a strong, more or less equal role in running a society, and inheritance and family names are passed down along the female line instead of the male. There are and have been a few of those, and they do seem to function with considerably less violence, both on an interpersonal and intertribal scale. I can't actually think of a genuine matriarchy, now or in the past (though if anyone can riddle me one, I'd be grateful), but I'm not convinced that true matriarchy would be any better than patriarchy. You'd still be in a position where one set of genitals ruled and owned everything, which would be as imbalanced and unequal by default as patriarchy is. Additionally, I hope no one forgets how cruel girls and women can be. I think back to the days of middle- and highschool, when the cruelest, meanest, pettiest group of students at my various schools was always a group of girls. (Think "Heathers" here.) Most of them didn't change much as time went on. I sure as fuck wouldn't want them in charge of anything. Anyway, just some thoughts... Have to agree that mostly true. Last week in my social anthropology class the professor stated that no evidence for an entirely matriarchal society has ever been collected. Matricarchal traditions and inheritance do exist, but no complete matriarchy. I get irritated when people bring up the "women ruled societies would be more peaceful". Yeah BS right there. From what I've seen its women who have the better capacity for cruelty. Hell, back when I was growing up I used to envy guys for how easier things were for them. It seemed to me that all they had to do was fight when I'd have to endure verbal and emotional abuse from other girls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pitchu Posted March 5, 2007 Share Posted March 5, 2007 For nearly 2,000 years, the Mosuo (pronounced MWO-swo) have lived in the Yunnan and Sechuan provinces of southwest China, practicing matriarchal traditions. One of China's 56 designated ethnic minorities, the Mosuo population of 56,000 people is tiny compared with China's overall population of 1.3 billion. The majority of Mosuo families live around Lugu Lake, a region that was isolated from the rest of world until the 1970s. At 8,580 feet (2,600 m) above sea level, it is the highest-altitude lake in the Yunnan province. It is also the second-deepest body of water in China, at some points deeper than 297 feet (90 m). Mosuo women carry on the family name and run the households, which are usually made up of several families, with one woman elected as the head. The head matriarchs of each village govern the region by committee. As an agrarian culture, much of the Mosuo daily life centers around tending to crops and livestock, with villages and households bartering between them for basic needs. A typical Mosuo house is divided in to four separate structures around an open courtyard. Traditionally, families share the building with livestock, and the living and sleeping areas are communal. With tourism and the modern world encroaching, some of this traditional structure is beginning to change. As shown in Zhou's film, electricity has now reached the more accessible Mosuo villages, which has brought satellite dishes and television -- and the cultural ramifications that come with it. The Mosuo are best known for their tradition of zouhun, or walking marriage, in which youths who have gone through a coming of age ceremony at the age of 13 are permitted to choose their own axia, or relationship. This nontraditional union means that men visit their lovers only by "walking" to them at night and leaving in the morning. If a child is born from the union, it is taken care of by the mother's brothers. With an increase in tourism to the area in recent years, many outsiders arrive expecting a "Shangri-La" of utopian free love. But this perception has been pushed mainly by the tourist trade, eager to attract more people to the area, rather than a reflection of true Mosuo culture. Women are free to take different sexual partners, and there is no stigma attached to bearing children with different partners or eschewing marriage. But more often than not, Mosuo women only take one sexual partner at a time, and often sustain long-term relationships with only one person. Misconceptions (or canny exploitation) of the Mosuo's sexual proclivities -- depending on which way you look at it -- have certainly fueled prostitution around Lugu Lake. But many of the women working in the brothels are more often Han Chinese women, from outside the region, who pass themselves off as Mosuo women. The traditional Mosuo religion worships nature, with Lugu Lake regarded as the Mother Goddess and the mountain overlooking it venerated as the Goddess of Love. The Mosuo also practice Lamaism, a Tibetan variation of Buddhism. Most Mosuo homes dedicate a room specifically for Buddhist worship and for sheltering traveling lamas, or monks. The Mosuo language is rendered not in writing, but in Dongba, the only pictographic language used in the world today. The Mosuo language has no words for murder, war or rape, and the Mosuo have no jails. More here: http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/rough/20...on_tolinks.html ******************************** Imo, much of the cruelty visited on girls by girls comes from the anger and frustration of having their "better powers" limited and unappreciated in our society. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lycorth Posted March 5, 2007 Share Posted March 5, 2007 Ah, I see...because males are violent, domineering, bloody, irrational, religiously inclined, demanding, prideful, war-mongering, thoughtless, intolerant and close-minded?? Exactly. Men are pigs and women couldn't possibly exhibit any of these characteristics I might as well make a thread about inner-city gang violence and call it "Racial Equality My Ass." Most of the women I've known in my life were far weaker than most men I've known, and exhibited more abusive tendencies. A variety of factors played into it, just like with the guys. Strength of one's intellect/spirit/emotions is mostly based on the individual and how that person reacts to things. Men may indeed be physically stronger than women for the most part, but I've seen nothing to indicate that any other kind of strength or stability is gender-based. Deal with it. I know Jubes didn't intend to generalize, but the title of this thread is just that - a nasty generalization. I'm a bit let-down, I must say, since this man wouldn't do any of that shit to his wife, either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godlessgrrl Posted March 5, 2007 Share Posted March 5, 2007 Oh cool, Pitchu - thanks for the reference on the Mosuo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pitchu Posted March 5, 2007 Share Posted March 5, 2007 Oh cool, Pitchu - thanks for the reference on the Mosuo. You're welcome. There are links to other matriarchal (or nearly so) societies at that site, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts