How Feminism Destroys the Femininity in Women and Love

[E_Irizarry]

Voto con dos dedos apuntando hacia abajo en contra de ususario Mank! Ameriskank Mank. jajajaja

[mank]

mank? Hey, rhymes with skank! Seriously, you have a problem with Winston's views of feminism? They you might want to perhaps debate your position instead of using the standard "wounded" woman trick in order to attack/insult him. C'mon, try using the logic portion of your brain instead of the "emotional" part. Can you do it?

I can. Apparently you can't. In my post, I quoted the parts of Winston's essay and subsequent post that I found debatable, then I explained why. You, meanwhile, have done nothing but attack and insult me. Further, and this is the funniest part, why did you assume that I was female? Was it because I expressed views that differed from yours? Well buddy - I'm a bloke. Sterling work, Sherlock. Tastes a lot like EPIC FAIL. Then, because you thought I was a woman, you decided your "argument" would consist of basically calling me an irrational skank. Wow man, you must've been number one on the debating team! With that attitude and razor-sharp wit of yours, you MUST be a hit with the ladies. How do you even have time to churn out over a hundred posts here? Maybe next time, try using the logic portion of your brain instead of the "emotional" part. Can you do it?

Winston "hates" women!? Now that is laughable!

Again, unsubstantiated. Apparently it's laughable just because you say so. Or is that your idea of debate?

As far as his taste in women? That is his choice and his decision. You seem to have fixated on the "skinny" part. [...] Deal with it!

No sir. YOU have fixated on the "skinny" part. I quoted the word "skinny" ONE time in amongst a list of qualities Winston had enumerated as feminine. You, meanwhile, have written a whole rambling paragraph on that topic amongst others, including, for some reason, penis size. YOU did that, not me. Try not to get us mixed up. Me: a guy who is not you. You: tiny penis. Deal with it!

Voto con dos dedos apuntando hacia abajo en contra de ususario Mank! Ameriskank Mank. jajajaja

Sorry, E_Irizarry. Wrong on BOTH counts. I am neither American nor female. Normally voting works with thumbs, not fingers. But, yeah, I can see why you went fingers. With TWO thumbs down, how are you gonna jerk off tonight?

Why not go to Russia for a week before continuing to bullshit your ignorant liberal ass off in front of the world?

Winston doesn't hate women in fact he hates masculinity. His problem is being more feminine than most western women. Which shows there is a problem, both in Winston and western women.

Perhaps it's because I'm not from the US, but unfortunately I was unable to derive from this how "treating people like people" was "ignorant" and from an "unsound foundation", nor why I had to go to Russia.

I partially agree with you, odbo, when you say "in fact he hates masculinity" - however, I would say that Winston hates "masculinity", that is, his perceptions of masculinity, in women. For example, I haven't yet seen an example where Winston decries "strength" or "independence" in men; he only takes issue with those qualities in women. Therefore I would have to disagree with you when you say "Winston doesn't hate women in fact he hates masculinity". Winston has decreed certain qualities as feminine, and those women who do not fit within his rather prescriptive template, he hates. It's not the qualities he hates - it's the fact that the women don't fit in his template. He's even invented some kind of "natural God given female energy" with which to back himself up and excoriate the women who don't fit. As he says, "It's the most awkward and dysfunctional thing." ... for him, and therefore, God, and Nature!

Thanks for at least providing debate, odbo. My words below aren't aimed at you.

Here are qualities that Winston mentions: loving, caring, nurturing, tender, strong, independent, kick ass, tough. You know what fellas? Where I'm from, we don't divvy it up. We expect everyone to have these qualities. Men, women, everyone inbetween. We expect our partners to be our equals. My woman sure as hell is and I can tell you none of the ladies on this meat market Winston runs could even come close. The toolbags in these forums clearly don't want equals. That's fine - you don't deserve them.

It's clear that opinions on these forums are completely set in stone, so there's no point me being here anymore. I'm not going to waste any more of my time or yours. You've proven that rational thought-provoking discussion here is so utterly miniscule you could cram it all into a thimble. Like your dicks. So long, jerkwads!

[zboy1]

Here are qualities that Winston mentions: loving, caring, nurturing, tender, strong, independent, kick ass, tough. You know what fellas? Where I'm from, we don't divvy it up. We expect everyone to have these qualities. Men, women, everyone inbetween. We expect our partners to be our equals. My woman sure as hell is and I can tell you none of the ladies on this meat market Winston runs could even come close. The toolbags in these forums clearly don't want equals. That's fine - you don't deserve them.

I don't think your comments are true at all. I do want equality in a relationship, but I also the women to respect the man in a relationship as well. The problem is that in America, the power has shifted so far to the woman, men are essentially second-class citizens. Look at the divorce proceedings where the vast majority of men get screwed out of custody and child support, while the women get-off scott free. And maybe the problem is that you are not American, so you don't really understand the dire situation here compared to your home country? Living overseas is a completely different situation than living in the States, and as a result may skew your opinions a little bit. Men are definitely treated much differently than they are here in this country.

[lavezzi]

On the subject, look at this delusional cunt:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dddgkEg2 ... re=related[/youtube]

Women will only be the same "politically, economically, legally, emotionally and socially" when they are the same biologically. Which is never.

[jamesbond]

On the subject, look at this delusional cunt:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dddgkEg2 ... re=related[/youtube]

Women will only be the same "politically, economically, legally, emotionally and socially" when they are the same biologically. Which is never.

After watching this video, I didn't know if I should laugh .............. or vomit!

[odbo]

http://hawaiianlibertarian.blogspot.com ... inity.html

"It seems as if women en masse in our 21st century BraveNewWorldOrder have all been inculcated to embrace either androdgyny or exhibitionism in their clothing and fashion choices. Both extremes are meant to either nullify or over-excite the human males hard-wired biological response to visual stimuli."

[FreeYourMind]

On the subject, look at this delusional cunt:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dddgkEg2 ... re=related[/youtube]

Women will only be the same "politically, economically, legally, emotionally and socially" when they are the same biologically. Which is never.

I will give Gloria credit for being appropriately named -- Allred (all the time) describes her communist (red) beliefs perfectly. If one does a little digging one will find that just about all so-called feminist "leaders" are Jews and almost all are commies and Cultural Marxists. It aint that complicated to figure out who the internal subversives in this country are.

[Winston]

I just updated this article with new paragraphs and a better title. Check out the OP.

[Jason of Dystopia]

This is a poignant article. I have long suspected that what lies at the source of the feminist de-balling tendency, is an overwrought and delusional paranoia about male sexuality. This was the natural and subconscious response on the part of the female collective in the West to entering formerly male dominated space. As the female share in the labor market has increased and women have become more "independent" and untethered from the family, the delusional paranoia has only increased and become more necessary.

Conspiracy theory and paranoia serve the needs of the subconscious. I suspect that the female collective subconscious in the West is becoming increasingly overwhelmed with fears of violence and sexual assault because they feel that the economic life they wanted to build and the independence they were taught would be difficult to extract from a "male-dominated, patriarchal society" came a lot easier than they thought. There is perhaps a lingering sense that they have decimated the male population and that that population is secretly planning its revenge, or is acting out its hostility and disempowerment through sexual revenge.

Because the Western female collective subconscious cannot allow itself to acknowledge the pure power politics that got women to the market-dominant position they now occupy, feminist intellectuals have been forced to formulate an entirely new worldview, with historical revisionism and everything, that proves the basic evil of men, the synthetic and oppressive nature of the traditional family, and the innate naturalness and normality of female homosexuality and close female relationships.

Women also like to take self-defense classes where the common undertone is male genital abuse. I have always felt that these female self-defense classes should serve as a symbol of the feminist era. It is passive-aggressive and under the guise of teaching women to protect themselves, allows them to find joy in de-ballification.

[DarkMinxMish]

Sup,

Well I don't think feminism is/was inherently bad at least when it first began. I think it was a nice freedom of expression for women who may have felt that they had no voice or place in society to really speak their minds. Some women just didn't like the roles they had to play and wanted an alternative, because they felt suffocated. Every time I think of feminism, I think bra burning as a symbol.

The modern form of feminism can be questioned though, because it's in a way gone to far in certain things. As a woman I think we should have a say about our lives, our decisions, and not be forced to conform to a certain standard. But not at the expense and feelings of others.
Also feminism is a western phenomenon that has leaked to other countries. Women in other countries can be viewed by some western women as 'oppressed' or traditionalist. They don't understand that these women are not at odds with their femininity (well at least not the truly oppressed ones who have choices) and can be strong despite attitudes and looks.

The positives- female camaraderie, access to jobs/careers once forbidden, open dialogue, truer expression w/o malcontent of the patriarchal system,
the ability to survive on one's own, females are entities in their own right, and a sense of empowerment.
The negatives- power hungry females, radical feminism w/o a true basis for it's reasons, materialism, bitches (cold hearted females w/o remorse for others), backstabbing, ball-bashing, discontent w/ traditional values and roles (some good & bad), and the tearing down of all males.

In a way feminism has made females less feminine in regards to their looks and how we dress, but I think society as a whole isn't what it use to be 50 yrs. ago. Our standard of dress has degraded constantly over the years until t-shirts, blue jeans, hoodies, and sweats became the norm.
With women society had pressure on them to dress 'appropriately' meaning wear dresses, skirts, corsets, stockings, heels, and etc...
and most of them did unless they wanted to be ridiculed and because they saw no problem with it. They were comfortable with their femininity.
Now though in the minds of some women feminism has put doubt in the way we see ourselves.
It's like a two-edged sword we (American women) see the benefits of dressing girly, womanly, and etc...it's nice and pretty, it makes you feel good, and you feel like your embracing yourself in a sense, but on the flip side you feel like you may not be taken as seriously, your a sexual object, your inviting trouble, and etc...It's hard to mesh these two different points of view and so it alienates some women.
I think, because of this theirs a resurgence in old fashions like the interest in pin up girls/art and 20s fashion.
It's sort of like an outlet.

But a majority of women are for the most part normal. They follow their bliss, or traditionalist by nature, feminine, shy, and/ or just want to have fun. No matter though most of them just want to fall in love, get married, have kids, and not be lonely. Women come in all different attitudes and personalities just as men. One of my friends in highly independent, unemotional most of the time, and sarcastic by nature. But she's insecure sometimes, childish, wants to have a boy/marriage, and gets upset every time her and her boyfriend fights. Feminism has affected our society greatly I agree with that, but the trouble that some men have is that maybe deep down inside they are still having trouble processing the equality it brings.
It manifests itself as macho behavior or controlling relationships.
In terms of the laws I do think it's a double standard and because the female is seen as weaker or more naturally a caregiver she benefits better.
Women do abuse this system and use it to financially and mentally ruin a man.
Feminism has created a sort of entitlement in some women where they feel the world is their oyster and they step over/use people to get where they want. Gold diggers use men for material and don't care for their feelings at all. Bitches use and/or emasculate men, because they can and it gives them a power trip. Women are rude and brush men off w/o reserve and in reaction this has created some wounded men.

I wanted to say in regards for women who act like bitches and etc...men have acted like bastards with women for centuries and I think it's just alarming to some people women act like this, because they don't care. And society still has an underlining expectation for women to 'care'.
There's still this veil of a double standard and women for the most part are still perceived by their looks, have to work twice as hard as men (depending on career), still expected to dress feminine, and are still sexual objects and fetishes.
Feminism has created opportunities for men as well in better access to women, sex w/o commitment, being able to befriend the opposite sex w/o being frowned upon or regulated, freer expression of feelings, and understanding of the female psyche.
So it's not a total lost and I do think it was an eye opener in behavior for both sexes.
As for guys getting burned by women and traded in...well guys have done this as well, but a majority of men don't understand how culture and values or the lack of them plays into this. The dating scene is majorly competitive more so than it's ever been and everybody has to play up looks, personality, and value. Tragically this is a by product of our modern lifestyle.

Lastly male and female energy is different and dualistic, but at the same time they complement. It's also known that females can contain a huge amount of male energy or yang naturally. So they come off as more masculine and assertive something that is still tolerated or frowned upon by our society. It's celebrated as being bad ass, but you know that's the one thats never going to get a man or it talked about in a tongue in cheek way.
Angelina is a amazon as far as the media is concerned and praised, but at the same time underlying that she's seen as dark, negative, or bad in comparison to Jen's more feminine girly image. There are naturally feminine females, masculine/driven one's, and women/girls who exhibit a dualistic energy comprising both parts yin and yang. We also have archetypes for females like the femme fatal, maiden, bitch, good girl, and etc...
Feminism has just brought this more towards the forefront of society.
The more radical one's are there shouting in forums and etc..."this body is mine and the baby is mine! So if I want to abort I will and I don't have to ask him a thing!" This is met with hell yeahs and your so right and etc...The female fails to realize it takes a man and woman to create a child.
That means both have a say in the decisions since both equally partook in the act.
When this is mentioned fury is unleashed like how dare you???
This shows the utter disregard for the other in the relationship as if the baby magically got there itself.
But that shows callousness on her part to not think about the consequences of having sex w/o taking into account that she could get pregnant.
And that childbirth is a by product of pregnancy that every female regardless of species has to go through.
I would think of it as a memory deterrent that reminds a female if this person is really worth having a baby for or is it worth it.
And for males the energy exchange works the same way not all males are manly and not all are sensitive.

Wow that was long sorry. lol
I tried to put all I remembered or thought of in this. Ok fire back with comments agree or disagree. Peace!

[zboy1]

DarkMinxMish, feminism originally started out being a very positive force for gender equality early on in its history, but shifted into a man-hating, radicalized movement during the 60s. It was hijacked and taken over by femi-naizs like Gloria Steinem and Betty Friedan. It's also when--not surprsingly--divorce rates skyrocketed, abortions exploded, and single family households grew rapidly. The family structure has been decimated ever since, and as a result, relationships between men and women have deteriorated to the point where they are now.

[Truthville]

Interesting Points DMM,

BUT........I think that what you are forgetting is that the culture and the media in America is SO pro-woman that, as a consequence, men are really given nothing BUT insults, attacks/studies/assaults on our sexuality, and attack after attack after attack AFTER having given every single right and privilege that woman enjoy today. Did woman march and protest for the establishment of these rights? Yes, they did BUT it was still MEN whom conceded and voted these laws into place. Do most woman appreciate it? NO!

What burns me isn't "equality" per se, I'm totally fine with that, it's the "I'm equal when I want to be, and not equal when it suits me or my situation. It's like playing the "strong, independent woman UNTIL things get to hard and then defaulting back to the "poor little woman" role in order to get help. MEN don't and never had this option!

YOU can't have it both ways IMHO!

As someone once said "Women are human beings, men are human doers!" MEN have no value UNLESS they are creating value for someone else!

You want to read something interesting about this topic DMM? Do some research on the ERA amendment and WHY modern feminists abandoned the fight for it and instead concentrated on piecemeal laws to achieve their aims for "equality!"

Also research the reaction of western to stories of men getting their penises mutilated or cut off. Read the comments! Read the reactions! Perhaps you see the TRUTH about how most men are thought of and treated in this country! Female genital mutilation is "Horrible" BUT men's genitals are mutilated by circumcision EVERYDAY in this country and NO one seems to think there is anything wrong with it?


Watch modern commercials/TV shows and view them in the context of how woman are portrayed and how men are portrayed. Who is portrayed positively and whom is portrayed negatively?

Once last thing, and it pertains to the "Happier Abroad" paradigm. Read up on what IMBRA is and WHY it became law despite the overwhelming evidence that it wasn't needed.

There is so much hatred and disrespect towards the average man from woman in this country! I think it's only going to get worse!

Remember what Orwell wrote in "Animal Farm," "Everyone is equal BUT some are more equal then others!" Modern feminism to a T!

[Jason of Dystopia]

Let me just say a few things about the commentary of DarkMinxMash:

She did not respond to anything that was written by Winston or by anyone else who was posting on this thread. She used no direct quotes to indicate what ideas she agreed with or was debating.

She is obviously young or a newly-minted speaker of English as her grammar, spelling, paragraph structure et. al. is without any kind of grammatical organization.

Overall, her post is meaningless as it is filled with cliches, non-sequiturs, and some startling admissions that disprove the overall point I THINK she iwas trying to make.

Why amazing realizations like the following don't condemn the entire "feminist" project as a moral plague on mankind is an indication of how oppressed and asleep we all are. She said:

In terms of the laws I do think it's a double standard and because the female is seen as weaker or more naturally a caregiver she benefits better.
Women do abuse this system and use it to financially and mentally ruin a man.
Feminism has created a sort of entitlement in some women where they feel the world is their oyster and they step over/use people to get where they want. Gold diggers use men for material and don't care for their feelings at all. Bitches use and/or emasculate men, because they can and it gives them a power trip. Women are rude and brush men off w/o reserve and in reaction this has created some wounded men.

So, what she is saying is:

Yes, women will use the law to gain unfair advantage over their former partners, the person who they have been most intimate with. The familiarity with him has bred a harsh contempt.

Yes, since feminism has granted women so much power, there is absolutely no limiting principle on their egos or on the means they choose to pursue their selfish drives.

Yes, women do not care if they ruin a man financially or mentally (meaning, for life), their formerly intimate partner. And some actually do it chronically because they GET OFF on doing it!

All this verifies what Winston has written and what we all know to be true. Thus, I personally feel no need to qualify any of my comments with the typical "feminism is good, but..." Feminism is female dominance and female supremacy pure and simple. The ancients understood that the female energy must be restrained and transmuted into more socially appropriate forms. They thought this about male energy as well. This was done through moral restraint and the appropriate social chastisement for those who stepped out of line.

I realize that this is where Winston, his fans and I will probably part company, but what I am talking about is called "traditionalism." It is a form that has been promoted by the wisest and most learned men (and some women) throughout history.

We return to it or we are doomed to suffer rule by ignorant ,impetuous, and over-confident female teenyboppers like Manx. Perhaps an indication of what she really believes is contained in the quote she uses as her signature. This is a poem called The Goblin Market by Christina Rossetti. Here is a brief feminist analysis of the poem:

“Lesbian� as the Undefined Woman and Female Subjugation

The story needed two women who could represent the “fall of the Lesbian� and the Lesbian who does not buy into the patriarchal roles and forced mind set that women are “supposed to� assume. Every aspect of the Lesbian is at risk of subjugation and the loss of self. “What is at stake is an individual definition as well as a class definition� (Wittig 2018). This means that not only is the individual at stake, but the entire class of Lesbian. By buying into the goblin’s advertising and eating the fruit, Lesbians are buying into the subjugation of their sex.



The Death of Autonomy and the Fetish

Though it seems to refer to the physical death, is can be interpreted as the death of the Lesbian, or the death of autonomy. Despite Lizzie’s pleading, Laura buys the fruit with a lock of her hair. It is important to note that the goblins sell their fruit and that the Lesbians buy into it one way or another. Lizzie’s cutting of her hair is symbolic of her active participation in her subjugation. It is the cutting of her hair and the exchange of it for the fruit that represents her “castration.� According to Freud in his essay The Uncanny, “the fetish is a substitute for the woman’s penis."

Her hair becomes both a fetish because of its value, as well as a phallic symbol representing her power. She gives with her lock of hair a tear. This tear is a symbol of her acknowledgement of her participation in her castration. She has given some of her power away making her become a powerless object of beauty. She has lost herself in the exchange and is no longer Lesbian, but wholly woman—as per Wittig’s definition of “woman.� She has become “woman� through a social relationship defined by men who have spewed propaganda so that she cannot define herself outside of the role they have provided.

Saving the Self through Retention of Autonomy

Lizzie remains Lesbian. She must save herself by gaining the knowledge of the goblins. She sees her sister dying because she has lost her sense of Self. She embodies Cixous “Women for Women� and becomes the catalyst for healing. Cixous says in The Laugh of the Medusa,� in women there is always more or less of the mother who makes everything all right, who nourishes."She seeks out the goblins so that she can obtain some of what they have in order to find a cure for her sister. They try and force the fruit on her but she will not yield. She remains Lesbian and is armed with the knowledge of what she fears.


Being Spirit Mother and Recognizing the "Lesbian"

The reference to the juice being like wormwood to her tongue is an interesting reference to how Lizzie saved Laura. (“That juice was wormwood to her tongue, she loathed the feast� –Rossetti). Wormwood is a bitter plant that has been use for centuries in various cures. Its name is derived from the Old English word wermod and means “spirit mother� in Anglo-Saxon. It has also been called the mind mender (Sebor Absinth). Both of these definitions refer to how the poisonous fruit indeed becomes the cure for Laura after Lizzie transforms it by taking it away from the goblins. She mends her mind from being “woman� and returns it to the state of Lesbian.

In the final stanza, Laura and Lizzie tell their children of their plight against the goblin men and the dangers of eating their fruit. Their most important message is found in the statement; “There is no friend like a sister� (Rossetti). Referring back to the statement “We are all lesbians,� the message is about the purpose of sisters is to help each other remain Lesbian. The message states: “To fetch one when one goes astray, to lift one when one totters down, to strengthen whilst one stands� (Rossetti). The message is a warning not to make women behave, but to not let Lesbians become subjugated women. In other words: Sisters do not let sisters fall prey to goblin men.

Could there be any clearer validation of what I've written in my initial post on this forum!

[Jason of Dystopia]

Micheal Buerke's What Are Men For?

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0L3ik9f ... ure=relmfu[/youtube]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hx0dewP6 ... ure=relmfu[/youtube]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hd7oN7xj ... ure=relmfu[/youtube]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQTlhp70 ... ure=relmfu[/youtube]

[/youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PXncoLzP ... fu[youtube][/youtube]

[DarkMinxMish]

Interesting Points DMM,

BUT........I think that what you are forgetting is that the culture and the media in America is SO pro-woman that, as a consequence, men are really given nothing BUT insults, attacks/studies/assaults on our sexuality, and attack after attack after attack AFTER having given every single right and privilege that woman enjoy today. Did woman march and protest for the establishment of these rights? Yes, they did BUT it was still MEN whom conceded and voted these laws into place. Do most woman appreciate it? NO!

What burns me isn't "equality" per se, I'm totally fine with that, it's the "I'm equal when I want to be, and not equal when it suits me or my situation. It's like playing the "strong, independent woman UNTIL things get to hard and then defaulting back to the "poor little woman" role in order to get help. MEN don't and never had this option!

YOU can't have it both ways IMHO!

As someone once said "Women are human beings, men are human doers!" MEN have no value UNLESS they are creating value for someone else!

You want to read something interesting about this topic DMM? Do some research on the ERA amendment and WHY modern feminists abandoned the fight for it and instead concentrated on piecemeal laws to achieve their aims for "equality!"

Also research the reaction of western to stories of men getting their penises mutilated or cut off. Read the comments! Read the reactions! Perhaps you see the TRUTH about how most men are thought of and treated in this country! Female genital mutilation is "Horrible" BUT men's genitals are mutilated by circumcision EVERYDAY in this country and NO one seems to think there is anything wrong with it?


Watch modern commercials/TV shows and view them in the context of how woman are portrayed and how men are portrayed. Who is portrayed positively and whom is portrayed negatively?

Once last thing, and it pertains to the "Happier Abroad" paradigm. Read up on what IMBRA is and WHY it became law despite the overwhelming evidence that it wasn't needed.

There is so much hatred and disrespect towards the average man from woman in this country! I think it's only going to get worse!

Remember what Orwell wrote in "Animal Farm," "Everyone is equal BUT some are more equal then others!" Modern feminism to a T!

Interesting Truthville... ok I see where your coming from with the issue of hopping the fence where women pronounce they are equal in every way, but still want the chivalrous benefits. Yes some women are very adamant about their equality and yet will throw a fit if a guy doesn't open the door and etc...yes this does happen and it's a double standard. This has been subconsciously absorbed into their brains since birth from the media and unrelenting propaganda machine telling them to expect all of this. Some were just spoiled and brought up as "princesses" and just expect it.
Yes it does happen, but their are many women who aren't feminist and may or may not want these privileges.

Women have always had that option to switch roles. From where she's fully capable of taking care of herself to where she becomes fragile and in need of help. History has proven this and men have accepted this w/o much complaint, because it's a benefit of being a female.
Men have always had one another to depend on when times have gotten rough that's just how it's been.
Women have been their for men, it's just been more emotionally than physically. But women who do something that's going to land them in shit by being boisterous and acting manly should be able to swallow their own mess. Whether good or bad and most women are strong despite their dispositions.
As for men being human doers well men have been doing that since forever. I mean men literally rule the world and everything they do isn't just for women and their families, but for other men. Man has this burden placed on him and have to carry it. We all know men are human beings, but you guys are (were) the doers of our species. There was this old blues song that described this situation perfectly. It was mournful and soulful, but the message was loud and clear...I'll find it.

As for men and the media God there could be a whole book about this subject. The scientific study, the test, the types, and etc...it bullshit.
I can see where you would get pissed about this, because it is insulting and degrading. There's no respect or honor in portraying and communicating about men anymore. Yes I have noticed the either hyper masculinity or the feminization of men on tv. It's disturbing and irritating.
There's no just letting you guys be w/o primping this or correcting that. I mean you guys are being accessorized and that's no different from how women are portrayed. But I can see with most of mainstream media it is verbal and eye garbage.
To note though the only difference with women is that some women are vain and like to compare themselves to other women. No matter the outcry women like to see pretty things and if they really didn't want to be objectified most would have not let themselves be used that way.
But when beauty is concerned shallowness can win over substance. Women with substance avoid these situations and won't agree with them.

There use to be different types of men portrayed on screen and in movies. These men were all different and all masculine in their own way. I just think the modern media since it's highly superficial has dumbed down the definition of masculinity to a certain archetypes.
There's this whole agenda where it seems in commercial and t.v shows the women is far more attractive, intelligent, and etc...than her male counterpart (i.e husband) who's either slow, a bumbling idiot, a sports nut, a big kid, undignified, and etc...
This is intentionally misleading people who look at this and absorb this eventually as the truth.
Like somehow in most tv shows the wife is always right and the sense of reason. How? Doesn't this alienate a lot of men who do not fit this stereotypes and where is it coming from. Is it purely from a feminist pro-women society or is it from somewhere else? Since most of the media circuits are owned by a few major companies and all are held by males is it deliberate?
Are they trying to skew our perception of things and why?

And for male disfigurement...when I think about this I remember vaguely Lorena Bobbit. I was way young when this occurred, but it was very disturbing. She meant to scar that man for life and she did. It was incredibly hateful and sexist. It was disturbing for the men at the scene of the crime. This is like every males worst nightmare come true and I'm not going to lie I remember some women who did laugh about this.
They cracked up, but not all of them felt it was right. Some men laughed as well, but their hearts wasn't in it and they were cringing.
If I remember correctly some women protest this and others were clearly on the mans side.
I mean this is what happening in our society peoples pains are being put out there for entertainment.
Tragedy and misfortune is like porn now at days. People are being desensitized to this stuff; the same with rape or child cruelty. People will feel for the victims, but some will just find it humorous and highly entertaining.
Maury and Steve Wilkos are really good examples of how the pain and stupidity of life are becoming spectacles for everyday people.

From what I read about circumcision it started out as a religious practice and now people claim it's more beneficial in the long run.
But there are those who think it is mutilation and from what I gathered most parts of the world dont' do this.
I believe that this shouldn't be mandatory and people should express their displeasure over it.
From reading I gathered that nerves and sensory is missing or damaged from this and when left intact it actually gives better protection and stimulation. Yes I do think babies shouldn't be subjected to this and it should be a choice.
It is unfair to you guys and can be claimed as a form of mutilation, because your organ is tampered with.

I read some comments where women didn't like the original form, because it wasn't aesthetically pleasing.
That's not her decision though and it's very self centered. Others thought it was less hygienic...as if having a vagina is any more "hygienic".
Then others thought there ought to be a law where it's mandatory...these girls were ignorant at best and dictatorial at worst.
They shouldn't want male babies to go through that just, because it what they'd prefer.
Some women are spoiled and forget about nature and the rights of others.

I hoped this helped a little...