Show ALL Forums
Posted In Forum:

Home   login   MyForums  
 
 Author Thread: Anyone else get this upgrade to see new users
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 4 (view)
 
Anyone else get this upgrade to see new users
Posted: 11/2/2015 7:55:38 PM
Same here -- male user, and now I get:
There are new users in your area!
Upgrade now to see who they are!

Curious to hear if this is just a male-user thing?
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 135 (view)
 
The confederate flag debate.
Posted: 7/17/2015 3:44:19 PM

The OP could have worded HER thread much more eloquently than she did by keeping it very simple (if not baiting a strong or even hostile response) and asking ( with out the token ONE black friend, bumpers sticker and wide "duh" act)over such an offensive symbol.


To try and better understand your reaction, I just went back and re-read her initial post--the meat of it was:

I'm not sure why the confederate flag is so offensive. It's a part of our history and especially a part of the history of the south. I just think this political correctness and fear of offending someone is going a bit too far.
and
I'm certainly not trying to start any race riot here, but I'd be interested in your thoughts.

Translating that into "baiting a strong or hostile response" seems like quite a leap.


If she had said../asked.
"I want peoples opinions on the confederate flag debate and why you feel this way.I didnt realize it hurt/offended so many.
It would have sufficed..SHE worded it to get a fire/fight response.


Wouldn't it be nice if everyone thought the way we did, even to the point of recognizing when they're wrong and we're right, and phrasing their questions and opinions in a way that neatly reflected our correctness and their wrongness? "Yeah, that'd be great, ...and can you work this Saturday? Yeah, thanks".

Her wording really wasn't THAT far off from the type you suggest - she did as for people's thoughts - and when she got some fairly solid "here's why people find it a symbol that should be ditched" sort of responses, she didn't pick up the fight - the more moderate responses she didn't disagree with, and the more nasty response, she responded pretty mildly to. Again, it seems like quite a stretch to deem that "baiting a fight". It struck me more as an opportunity to - as politely as the subject allows - to explain why it offends. The more bully-ish responses aren't likely to help anyone's understanding, right? This isn't a news flash to you or anyone.


Empathy is putting yourself in anothers shoes and actually caring about how they feel.
If you have to ask if the confederate flag offends people then where is your empathy?


For someone who doesn't understand why it offends, I'd thinking publicly asking is better than not, no? Or do you somehow think that bullying-type responses are likely to increase the empathy you think someone should have? Or that "you will continue to get what you get." is going to help those who don't find the flag offensive to understand the other side's view?




I dont need to tippie toe around her feelings when she or anyone does these things.
Not my job with her or on the forums when an idiotic thing is said that I know one of such an age should know better than to say.
But kudos for you defending the helpless,clueless & innocent woman that she wants you to think she is, thats old enough to know better.
Grow up both of you.


It really sounds more like you just have personal issues towards the OP, vs being able to talk about the issue. "Nice-up" maybe?


Maybe hundreds of men wearing a" Get in the kitchen,stay pregnant, hand me a beer and shut up split tail" T shirt swill open her eyes. How would she like THAT flag on her states government building?


"B!tch, get back to being barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen and get me a beer" is hardly an idea confined to the South. And perpetuating that idea doesn't do much for the discussion either. It's great if you want to b!tch slap someone into shutting up - but do you really think it'll actually do anything useful? Or do you care about that and are just happy to be doing the slapping? It's a bit discouraging to see people taking the low road, when it seems like a relatively easy topic to actually do something useful - and when they're on the right side of the issue. Such is life in America these days -- 'talk at and debate', not 'listen to and converse'.
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 128 (view)
 
frankly, ms skawlit..someone might give a damn
Posted: 7/16/2015 10:47:03 AM

FRANKLY I dont give a dam miss scawlit.Im not bullying you at all.


Of course you are.


So if you are going to continue posting such things, you will continue to get what you get.


One would hope someone with empathy and grace could reply to something 'touchy' without needing to go over the top to the point of bullying, but...


I have something you obviously dont. EMPATHY and grace.
but then also:
I take offense that you can be so ignorant
What it means to others, not YOU is whats important.
You are NOT southern.
I have a million things I could say to you/your post but choose not too. You wouldn't get it ,or worse wouldn't care to.


Y'all have a funny way of showing grace and empathy there. Someone with EMPATHY could disagree with her view, while still understanding it in her context, and someone with grace could say why they disagreed with it, without namecalling or bullying - and they'd see that what it means to her is as important as what it means to others; and that calling someone ignorant does nothing to bridge the divide between it's meaning to her vs you.
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 261 (view)
 
What do you think your odds are? Why? Are you o.k. about it?
Posted: 7/12/2015 2:05:01 PM

Henry... as long as your eyes are open, which it appears to be, and you are ready for whatever happen, which appears you are, then my man, .... enjoy that ride. We only have one life, do whatever makes you happy.
Never mind what anyone says.
Hope your ride is fire crackin', lips smackin', hip shakin', earth quakin, awesome.


I'm inclined to believe most/all of what Pig is saying on this one - but when it comes time to act, I'm with Charmin on this one - give me a great, wrong ride, over rightfully backing away and treading water. I'll take the crash, to have the splash.
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 34 (view)
 
New dating site for women that deals with OLD problems
Posted: 7/6/2015 8:49:18 PM
Followup: So I'd emailed the "Siren" site to ask about access for PC users -- didn't even get a courtesy reply from them, let alone an answer. Not a good sign for a new dating site trying to make it.
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 7 (view)
 
Date but no time confirmed?
Posted: 7/3/2015 4:03:13 PM
That'd be odd, yes - what did his invitation look like? "lets meet at the park on July 4th"? What did your "yes" back look like? (that would have been the time to ask the time, before saying yes?) I'd find it very odd to make a date without a time - I'd find it very odd to say yes to one without the time either?
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 8 (view)
 
Solo holidays
Posted: 7/2/2015 8:32:15 PM
I usually travel solo too - most women I've dated aren't up for the duration of road trips that I'll do at times. Years ago, did a great one from Washington DC, out to the Cumberland Gap, down through Shenandoah Natl Park, down to Gatlinberg Tenn, through the Great Smokies, over to Mt Mitchell and back home. When I first came to Colorado I did a one-day, 14 hr drive from Col Springs, down to Royal Gorge, out to Monarch Pass, Black Canyon on the Gunnison, out to Grand Junction, Glenwood Springs, up Independence Pass (where I had a face-to-face meeting with a big white mountain goat at midnight!) down to Buena Vista and back across South Park and home. Solo road trips can be great :)
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 8 (view)
 
The confederate flag debate.
Posted: 7/2/2015 4:10:44 PM

No one should deny or excuse what the flag symbolizes.
When you remove it from games, battles, movies,photos and books concerning the civil war, however, one is approaching schizophrenia.

Indeed. And we'd be following in some other footsteps that I'd also consider silly. The game company "Paradox" had a game based on WW2, but due to German laws about the Nazi flag, ended up leaving that symbol out of the game - which is odd for a game that covers the rise and fall of the Nazis. And, there's already pressure to do just that here, too:

http://techcrunch.com/2015/06/25/apple-bans-games-and-apps-featuring-the-confederate-flag/#.vr6lwt:EkCL

Thankfully they quickly backpedaled:
http://money.cnn.com/2015/06/26/technology/apple-puts-some-civil-war-games-back/

But there's enough people with that mentality -- outlaw what we don't like -- be it flags or 32-oz sodas -- that you can bet we haven't heard the end of it.
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 25 (view)
 
New dating site for women that deals with OLD problems
Posted: 7/2/2015 3:45:06 PM

But you know what? I will bite. I am on fire :-D So I'm going to try these apps and report back my findings.


I love your spirit on that! I checked out "Siren", since that was the "women do the screening" one - but their main screen seemed to only let you access them via a cellphone app...and since I work on a computer all day, I don't bother owning a smartphone...so I may be SOL on there, before I can even get there ;) I did email them and ask them if they accommodate PC / browser traditional users - but no response yet.
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 6 (view)
 
The confederate flag debate.
Posted: 7/2/2015 3:31:51 PM

The first is a racist symbol and the second is treasonous.


Hi MissScawlett - let me try to answer a little less jerkish. First, I'll admit I come at the whole Confederate flag debate as a Northerner. I also look at it from a fairly RW,State-Rights view. And trying to be as open-minded as I can muster, I'll punt on the "racist symbol" part. I'm left with the treasonous/secessionist thing staring me in the face.

Next, I'll further concede that there ARE times and places for treason and secession - living so many formative years in Boston with the Freedom Trail and all the Revolutionary War history, it'd be hard to miss. And who knows how things may be perceived had we lost the Revolution and stayed British? "Suck it up and pay your 5% or so taxes, it isn't worth killing people over" may have won out as a philosophy, with "Give me Liberty or give me Death", "Live Free or Die", etc being viewed as treason and over the top? So I can even somewhat cushion the treason argument, if I can see the treason as for a noble cause. (tipping my hand there)

Let's even further narrow the issue and eliminate the racism issue by saying, "what if all the slaves in the South had been white"? More like serfdom in Russia? And the debate had been whether to free the serfs or keep them tied to land and landowner? I would view that as a noble cause on the part of the North, if the South refused to end such a system. And I'd view the South choosing secession - and the inevitable war that it would trigger - over freeing the serfs as "exceedingly un-noble"...to the point of being beyond excusable.

Thus the symbol of that secession - the Confederate Flag, at best would be viewed by me as a symbol of "We'd choose war rather than let people be free". And "You aint the Boss-of-me" to the point of just being defiant for defiance's sake - even if they are wrong.

So even as a RW, States-Rights kind of person, I just can't seem to buy the Confederate Flag as "OK". I don't agree with the attempts to bury it from private ownership, but I do view those who choose to display it on their personal property the way I described above. (defiant for defiance's sake) I view getting rid of the Dukes of Hazzard as dumber than the show was (which was pretty dumb). Is Gone with the Wind next? Are we going to tear down statues of Robert E. Lee, since as the head of the treasonous army? (yet at the same time, recent history has a member of our current Administration praising Mao, who in many's book was far, far worse than Jefferson Davis would ever be viewed).

And all that is being as generous as I can muster so far - now you toss back in the reality of the race issue that I tried to take out, and it's just 10x worse.

As an imperfect comparison - how do we feel about people flying the Mexican flag in Texas, as a sign of "Sure, you won the war, but we still defy being part of you and fly this flag as a symbol of our cultural difference with you"?
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 22 (view)
 
New dating site for women that deals with OLD problems
Posted: 7/2/2015 12:23:23 PM

There is a lot of buzz about a new dating site for women. The site makes the ladies the gate keepers and only approved men are allowed on the site


Given the high number of women who prefer not to have to "initiate", I wonder how that will play out?
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 133 (view)
 
Acceptable behaviour?
Posted: 7/1/2015 4:30:38 PM

Norman? Is that you?


You read my mind - if he tells us he runs a motel for a living, I'm outta here ;)
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 124 (view)
 
Acceptable behaviour?
Posted: 7/1/2015 2:03:01 PM
Clearly you and I are programming ours wrong, and his is right :D
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 122 (view)
 
Acceptable behaviour?
Posted: 7/1/2015 1:37:23 PM

POF only ever shows local views (fact)


Odd -- my "whoviewedme" just now showed a Florida, a Texas and a California - and I'm in Colorado.
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 139 (view)
 
Messaging Experience on PoF
Posted: 7/1/2015 1:24:59 PM

There is a line between being honest / blunt and being cruel / nasty.
I am sure many nasty people or those trying to be cruel will say they are just being honest.
Hard to tell without direct quotes if this is honesty or being nasty.


Right - when I hear people say they're "un-apologetically that way", I wonder if they have lost the distinction for "blunt/direct" and "bitter/jerky"...you rarely have to be apologetic for actual directness, since people like directness. The phrase "un-apologetically direct/blunt" does seem to have become more popular.
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 20 (view)
 
Should you move..... A fairy tale....
Posted: 7/1/2015 9:17:00 AM
I think the idea has potential - and there's some good advice already given -- I'd say the two best bits are:
1) "test-drive it" - you could put your place on the market and do an "extended test vacation" on a place you're thinking of landing at, and just see how you like it -- it tends to take some time to sell a place, so there's that built-in buffer. If the place sells immediately for a high price, then you're golden regardless - and if it doesn't, you've got "time". And if your realtor has overhyped what you can get for the place, that'll become apparent during your test-drive.

I wouldn't want to actually use the yacht as home - here's some fun reading on that:
http://www.living-aboard.com/Cons-Of-Living-Aboard.html

But, a smaller home near the water could work - and, who knows - from a romance perspective -- maybe you'll run into a guy who's made the same decision and landed at the same place, and you'd immediately have a basis of commonality :)
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 99 (view)
 
When The Heavy Lifting Has Already Been Done
Posted: 6/30/2015 7:55:52 PM

Maybe he means that they have the look of bitterness because an attractive man hasn't approached in a long time.


That's how it read to me too - which implies he doesn't view himself as "what that kind of woman would consider attractive" -- thus they still had the sour look with him there. Takes a pretty warped, cynical view to read "he thinks he is one of those attractive men" from his words - especially when he described himself as "the theater wonk with gayface ".
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 8 (view)
 
Racist signs outside of African American church
Posted: 6/30/2015 7:20:08 PM

What this black kid did is no different than firefighters setting fires. I think is all a byproduct of a mental disorder.


I could see that - or the big Hayman fire out here a few years back, that was started by a forest-worker burning love-letters from an ex-bf.
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 4 (view)
 
Racist signs outside of African American church
Posted: 6/30/2015 6:14:37 PM
It's the kind of stuff you'd expect some level of internal shame to prevent. Maybe I'm wearing rose-colored glasses, but I couldn't see those sorts of things being done 30 years ago? People would be too ... humiliated(?) to troll the world like that...but now? Ironically, someone is voting to delete this thread as trolling.
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 1 (view)
 
Racist signs outside of African American church
Posted: 6/30/2015 5:30:52 PM
Bizarre case....someone was posting threatening signs outside of an African-American church here, after the South Carolina shooting.

http://www.kktv.com/home/headlines/Hateful-Posters-Outside-Church-310571351.html
"Someone is behind a slew of hateful signs posted outside a Colorado Springs church. They were stapled to a tree just outside the New Covenant church near downtown on Sunday.

This is the third straight weekend they've dealt with the signs. Pastor Roland Joyner said whomever is responsible is becoming more and more brazen. This time, they were put up in the broad daylight, while they were in their Sunday service."

"One sign references the KKK. Another says "Black men beware, you are the target." These messages, combined with the recent massacre in South Carolina, has the congregation edge.

"We locked our doors this morning. So, we were inside but it shouldn't be that way, you shouldn't have to lock your doors in the church, I'm speechless," Joyner told us."

Today, the man who posted them was caught and arrested...turns out to be a whack-job that sounds mentally ill:

http://www.krdo.com/news/man-admits-to-posting-hate-signs-around-town/33843518

The kicker - he's black.
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 72 (view)
 
When The Heavy Lifting Has Already Been Done
Posted: 6/30/2015 12:44:32 PM

I'm guessing you just think its dumb to judge a book by its cover...or a whole damn library of books, for that matter.


Yet look how hard -- in terms of both time and money -- people work to make that cover reflect on how they feel about themselves, and what they'd like to project. "Don't judge a book by its cover" is really a pretty silly saying.
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 40 (view)
 
When The Heavy Lifting Has Already Been Done
Posted: 6/30/2015 9:03:57 AM

I've often wondered what it would be like to actually meet again "the one who got away" many years ago. I always say I never go back to where I've been when it comes to men. But on second thought, I can think if at least two that I would probably break that self imposed rule for.


That's a life-philosophy I've heard many, many women espouse over the years - "never look/go back" when it comes to earlier relationships. I've only run across a few men who held that view - so it seems to be one of those relatively-consistent gender things. Do others find that as consistent, and have any thoughts on why?
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 35 (view)
 
Why are men required to do the work in finding love?
Posted: 6/26/2015 2:42:16 PM

Doing the work? I considered having to take the initiative to be an advantage. I was able to contact anyone I wanted instead of passively sitting by and waiting for what I wanted to drop out of the sky.


Amen to that -- what a crappy position to be in, to have it considered socially-unacceptable to actively go after what/who you want. It's great when women step up too - and plenty do - but 'work' - whatever it is - usually makes you a better person. Careful what you wish for...
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 1342 (view)
 
Are 21st century, western women intimidating?
Posted: 6/25/2015 2:58:24 PM
A bottle of red, a bottle of white - it all depends upon your appetite :)

I *am* assuming Charmin doesn't mean most men - or hoping at least :) It just struck me as bizarre -- I guess my brain was out of "Debate Mode" like people tend to get here -- that odds are, every man who reads her (words? accusations? I'm not sure what to call them), what she's saying just wouldn't apply to them. It'd be like a guy here throwing it out that "women who cut off men's pen*is are evil", and then ****ing all the women out for not showing enough empathy over the subject...I'd assume all the women would agree with the men.

Imagine if this whole rape debate were done over happy hour, with us all sitting around a table.

Women: Rape is bad, happens too much.
Men: Yup, rape is bad, happens too much, we'd never do it.

So, do you want red or white? Or how about a maitai?
And that'd be the whole conversation. Yet here, somehow, people go all holy-batsh*t and toss all kinds of silly accusations around. Bizarre.

I'll take the maitai :)
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 1333 (view)
 
Are 21st century, western women intimidating?
Posted: 6/25/2015 2:09:33 PM

Surely most (even pirood) can agree that the number is higher than it should even exist to be.


I think we'd ALL agree on that, Charmin - look at it this way -- in all likelyhood, you're saying that to a group of guys who never have, and never will, and never WOULD, commit rape. We're on your side. We're of your same view/nature on the whole idea of it. We view those who would, in the same light you do. If left to us, there would be exactly what you (and us) would like to see - NO rapes.

Yet, somehow, it's not enough. We're still seeing our empathy questioned, and the general gender-dividing nature of this topic be upheld. When you think of it that way, it's kind of bizarre.


With this understanding, one can empathize with those alarmed by this fact.
That is... if one has empathy.


Like that. "We" lack "understanding"..."empathy"...we're not "alarmed" by rape. Really? You're talking to guys who are on your side about rape - so how do you perpetuate these mindsets about us?
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 1315 (view)
 
We can agree to disagree
Posted: 6/24/2015 2:39:40 PM

I feel like you genuinely listened to what I said and, even if you disagree with me, you are carrying on a civil conversation with me . You can call it 'validated' if you want.


That works :) So would this be a fair summary?
1) the main thing you want us to get from these things is to acknowledge not just the issue, but that yours/others experiences, even if they are different from our own, are still valid - and that the issue is bigger than "traditional stats have shown", and therefore bigger than "someone who has no experience and relies on those traditional stats" would think.
2) GRAVY would be if said "traditional stats follower" expanded his reading and considered some other sources of stats, and at least questioned for himself the scale of the issue.
3) And, no particular ACTION is being expected here, aside from "reconsider and expand our view". (and men's "so what do you want us to DO with that" is, like frequently happens between men and women, another case of us men "looking to fix" instead of "hearing, validating and expanding our view"? And even trying to relate to it from our own experience is a bit out in left field for women, because there's just no good comparison with what can happen to men, vs what rape can do to women?
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 1313 (view)
 
We can agree to disagree
Posted: 6/24/2015 1:44:21 PM

Posted: 6/23/2015 1110 AM VolkanoKing
Sometimes people run out of intellectual ammo, and begin to attack someone's character, or something you THINK is part of their character. This is classic, and has a term called ad hominem. This goes on all the time all over the internet, and of course, on here.


Why yes, yes they do :)


Posted By: volkanoking on 6/24/2015 229 PM
Perhaps this is also why we get the "lectures and lessons" from men on how to behave and think. It is the "male solution"..the way to fix a problem. Generally because the woman's lack of proper attention towards men (well, mostly towards the guy posting and crabbing about this in particular) needs a psychological assessment and treatment program.


Well played, VK - the pot is a fine, gleaming shade of black today :)
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 1311 (view)
 
We can agree to disagree
Posted: 6/24/2015 12:58:40 PM

I'm sorry if it sounds frustrating.
I don't want you to agree with what I believe.
I want you to look for yourself and make your own decisions.


It's not frustrating, it actually fits the whole Mars/Venus thing to a tee - how many times have people heard, "I don't want you to do the dishes because I asked you to, I want you to do them because you want to do it for me!"?

You don't want us to believe what you believe -- you want us to believe what we find to be true on our own - but - it'd better match up with what you believe. And if we come to believe something different, there's something wrong with us. Otherwise, we wouldn't be having this discussion. :) We wouldn't be talking about all these things you want us to acknowledge:


Acknowledgment is more than admitting that rape exists (which people have done – some in a rather backhanded fashion). It is admitting that what the raped person might be wearing or where the raped person was has no bearing on being raped. It is realizing that just because a woman got pregnant doesn't mean it was consensual (yes, some people believe that a baby proves she asked for it). Acknowledgment is admitting that rape can and does happen in the best neighborhoods as well as the worst, by friends and family as well as complete strangers. It is admitting that men can be raped. Acknowledgement is recognizing the validity of someone else’s experience (whether typical or not, whether you have had the experience or not). Is it a disconnect? I’m not sure what you mean by that. However, when some people say that no one is denying sexual assault exists, they then temper that statement with something like – but it’s only one person in 4000 – that is a denial along the line of ‘sure, rape exists, but not in my experience/back yard/town/country/world’.


What are we to think when you have that detailed a list of what we need to BELIEVE/acknowledge, but when pressed, you say "I want you to look for yourself and make your own decisions. "?

I hope this doesn't make you feel defensive, because that isn't the point - the point is more the disconnect between men and women on these things - and this exchange seems a fairly normal example of it, don't you think?
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 1308 (view)
 
We can agree to disagree
Posted: 6/24/2015 11:40:08 AM
UFO, I feel that you dodged that one a bit. You wanted us to understand that it is "more prevalent than it appears" - I don't know how MUCH more prevalent YOU feel it is, and therefore how much more prevalent you want US to understand/accept - since all that came from your response to "what is it you want us to do with this information?"


You're right - men are usually looking for solutions (and sometimes that's some of the best feelings in the world). What would you suggest?


So you want us to understand/believe the right thing / - i.e. - to agree with what you believe -- but you don't have anything you actually want us to DO with that belief/info? This is just a point of "you want us to believe the right thing" and to "validate your feelings" on this? (The "Venus" thing?)
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 1305 (view)
 
We can agree to disagree
Posted: 6/24/2015 10:52:32 AM

All I wanted was for men in general to understand that sexual assault is far more prevalent than it appears.


OK. So once we accept that it is far more prevalent than it appears (I'm not sure how prevalent it appears, or how much more it actually IS - that's still an open question?) what is it us men are supposed to do with that information? Since, to tie back into the Mars/Venus thing that I see happening here, Men aren't so good at "just listen and validate me", we're always looking for solutions/actions, even if they're ineffective.
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 1214 (view)
 
We can agree to disagree
Posted: 6/22/2015 3:54:05 PM

None of this is about "getting a raw deal." Life is good, really good at the moment-it's about debating with a FEW over the top, ridiculous men. Whom, by the way, do NOT represent most men. It's the extremes, who always show up here, with whom I engage. It's a good deal of fun and interesting.
Weak comeback, BTW! I always hope for more original material to work with.


VK - I have to admit to being left puzzled by your postings - you throw out things like "back when there was no such thing as marital rape", and now the "mutilation" post, but when asked what it means you leave it for others to respond for you, and choose to respond with stuff like this. We all pick and choose what we want to comment on, but it sure looks funky. Did the other woman's responses to "what should we get from that/do with that" match your thoughts on why you posted it?
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 1201 (view)
 
Are 21st century, western women intimidating?
Posted: 6/22/2015 2:46:22 PM

What I am seeing is a disconnect on both sides.


That's where I'm at with all this as well -- I'm hoping to find the time to try and better explain why this rape-tangent looks so much like a "Men are from Mars, Women from Venus" workshop - At least at a high level, people seem to be saying the same things - some of the details - like what we're supposed to get from VK's "mutilations" post, get a little dicier, but at least at a higher level it seems the same----just in a different language (men's language vs women's language). Theoretically by our age, we KNOW that men and women tend to think differently, like the Mars/Venus stuff tries to explain. We've probably all had good laughs over it at other times - like the idea of men rolling their eyes at some of the "but honey, how do you FEEL about xyz" and replying "yes dear"; or women rolling their eyes at "why does he try to FIX whatever I'm talking to him about, instead of just LISTENING to me and making me feel validated?"...but in this thread, it's different - those differences have lead to some pretty off-the-wall name-calling, and seem to show a complete inability to - not so much to SEE from the other's perspective - but to even accept the notion that the other perspective can be DIFFERENT without being ANTI. To stick with the topic of the thread, 21st century western women may or may not be intimidating, depending on who you ask, but they don't seem so hot at accepting male/female differences in looking at things, without going batsh*t-bonkers over it.
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 1193 (view)
 
Are 21st century, western women intimidating?
Posted: 6/22/2015 12:41:32 PM


Help me out here - what is it you're wanting us to get from this, and what are you hoping we'll do with it?

Acknowledge sexual abuse, recognize inequality (sexual or otherwise), and if you're ever confronted with it then speak out.


#2 is pretty vague -- I'll skip him for now unless you want to clarify him - but for #1 - I didn't get the idea anyone denies sexual abuse? Is that where the disconnect is, from your perspective? Do you feel the men in this thread don't acknowledge sexual abuse?
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 1186 (view)
 
Are 21st century, western women intimidating?
Posted: 6/22/2015 10:03:36 AM

We've got countries right now who regularly dismember, stone to death, beat and throw acid on women..for things like wanting to get an education, driving a car or who dare to go out somewhere without a male escort. When a woman is raped, SHE is murdered, to protect the family's pride.

There has also been a jump in clitorectomies in California. It's happening here now. The complete destruction of female pleasure, to keep them from "straying."

We also had a Georgia senator in 2011 try to introduce a bill that would make having a miscarriage punishable by death. Now there's some old fashioned American values for you!

I stand by my statement that not only would women be systematically destroyed simply for BEING women..they have been for a long time now.


VK - Help me out here - what is it you're wanting us to get from this, and what are you hoping we'll do with it?
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 1068 (view)
 
Are 21st century, western women intimidating?
Posted: 6/20/2015 1:30:19 PM

What do YOU think it means when VK gave a very passionate, articulate description of how it feels to be in fear of being assaulted merely because you posses breast and a vagina, and how it feels to know that if a man chooses to overpower you, he probably can, and ALL that maleman said in response was, "uh...us guys can fear getting beat up".

He did not even respond to anything she said about why women might feel this way. Nope. Just straight to turning the tables. Unsuccessfully, I might add, unless his point was to iterate that men also fear men.

Why did he do that?


OK - here's how I'm seeing it, as I'm sitting here watching that exchange. Again, I may be all wet, but...I feel like I'm watching a workshop-lesson on the old "Men are from Mars, Women from Venus" thinking. We may be discussing "21st century" thinking, but the old-style "Mars/Venus" stuff sure seems to hold sway here. Reading what VK wrote, I'd think something like these things:

http://www.webmd.com/men/features/marriage-mistakes-men
""Women want their feelings to be understood and validated," says Maslow, who has a private practice in Crozet, Va. "Men have to discover this. "Rather than simply listening, though, men tend to go into fix-it mode. That’s a mistake."
or:
http://yourselfinbalance.com/men-emotional-communication-challenge-of-empathy/
"Generally women are not looking for help in fixing the situation. Most women take understandable pride in being able to fix things themselves. What they want here is empathy for the way they feel, which simultaneously reinforces the validity of their feelings and makes them feel closer to the person expressing the empathy."

From a guy's perspective, we hear something - in this case "the Rape Card" (which seemed to be played as a shaming technique in this thread, and was brought in by the women in this, not the men) and we have one of two reactions:
A) "that's crap" - those reactions are pretty obvious and you've seen some of that here
B) "that's not crap" --and if that's the initial reaction, guys will typically do one of two things:
1) try to fix it - in this case, he can't
2) try to commiserate. Bill Clinton was a master of that - "I feel your pain". Guys on my hockey team do this all the time -- someone gets you with a high stick, and your teammate is likely to say, "yeah, that same guy tried to lift my stick last shift, missed, and caught me right in the chops!". Now in the case of the Rape Card, we can't quite "feel your pain" - so the closest thing would be to commiserate the way he did - relate some way he might feel similar fear/pain. If we can't fix it, maybe we can at least make the other person feel like it's at least somewhat a shared misery, since shared miseries aren't as bad as solo misery.

I think in general women are more in tune to this "hear me and validate me, don't try to fix it" thinking - yet when something like this happens, your response is to go off on the guy like that. It's not like there's ANY possible "good response" to the Rape Card when it's dragged into a discussion - yet it seems to come up a lot - more as a Shaming thing than a discussion-builder. (think of the context it was first brought up in this thread) It comes off as "this is about how bad men are, so don't you DARE try to say a man can relate!".
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 1049 (view)
 
Are 21st century, western women intimidating?
Posted: 6/20/2015 6:36:29 AM

"I'm guessing to ensure the continued exchange of ideas and witty dialouge?"

That MUST be it.


Without being flippant - what ELSE could it be, other than the thing you characterized it as? Couldn't there be some other reason that perhaps isn't as anti-woman as you made it out to be?
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 1044 (view)
 
Are 21st century, western women intimidating?
Posted: 6/20/2015 5:10:40 AM

"your response is to flip the script and say "Well, men feel threatened by male violence too. We can get beat up too! " Wow. ****ing lame.

This is all they EVER do. Flip and compare. Flip and compare. This is the best they can come up with. Because nothing....nothing a woman tries to explain is truly valid. The information is instantly crushed up and tossed out, with return fire consisting of impotent non-game changing dummy bullets.


Maybe I'm mis-reading what the person these two ladies were replying to, but his response didn't come across to me as "return fire" or "crushing up and tossing out" what was being said. But, maybe that's because I'm male? VK, NOG, why do you think guys do what it is you're perceiving them doing? What's the purpose of them "flipping and comparing" - is it to make what the woman said NOT be valid?
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 804 (view)
 
Are 21st century, western women intimidating?
Posted: 6/11/2015 8:19:05 PM

Interesting how a thread about "intimidating women" goes to rape and intelligence "dumbness"


That's one of the interesting things about forums like this - unlike in a game of post-office, you can actually go back and see how a conversation morphed like that. With the rape topic, it was actually women in the thread that went there first - and second:



Msg: 343 (posted by a woman)
The good old days-when women had no recourse against marital rape.

Msg: 473 (posted by a woman)
I stand by my comment that the only thing women need protection from is men. Most of the very bad things that can befall a woman are inflicted by men (assault, rape, emotional abuse, riots, murder, WAR)

Msg: 506 (posted by a woman)
So the main thing that most women need physical protection from is violence. Who perpetrates the violence against women individually ( assault, rape, etc.) and against society in general (riots, wars, etc.) ??? It's just bit disingenuous to suggest women need men to protect them when in fact much of which threatens women's physical safety is carried out by men.

Msg: 509 (posted by a man)
Hmmmm.... kinda like the law they are trying to introduce in the UK that says that if women choose to drink too much and have sex with a guy, the guy will be charged with rape.
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 792 (view)
 
Are 21st century, western women intimidating?
Posted: 6/11/2015 3:01:34 PM
It happens to the best of us - and even those who are above average, mean, or median :)

For Boo -- "how do we cull the herd" - reminded me of my all-time favorite forum thread:
http://forums.plentyoffish.com/datingPosts8511849.aspx

It's long, but hysterically funny - and gives a lot of examples of things people say in profiles that immediately gets them categorized as "Next!" material!
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 787 (view)
 
Are 21st century, western women intimidating?
Posted: 6/11/2015 2:10:07 PM

Also an average doesn't mean 1/2 are above and 1/2 are below.
If four people each bowl 50, 50, 50 and 300 the average is 112.5, but 3 were below the average score.


Which illustrates well that I'm probably below average on clearly using "average", "mean" and "median".
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 784 (view)
 
Are 21st century, western women intimidating?
Posted: 6/11/2015 1:57:16 PM

Half the women are of below average intelligence? How did you arrive at this conclusion?
The irony being, you're absolutely correct on the other, as you surely showed who/what you are.
You come across as arrogant and condescending..


The ability to laugh at ourselves is such a big thing ... let's face it, we're all below-average on a fair number of things. By definition, half of anything will be above and half below average - that's just "by definition" -- but some people read such an obvious thing and they just lose their blooming minds. "Here's your sign!". Ever try to tell a parent that their wonderful little student is below-average on something? Ay yi yi!

If we can't look at ourselves, and see where WE are below average on at least a few things - we've just id'd where we are on the "introspection" average.

On the other hand, Boo looks to have found a compliment in there - 'cause 50% are above average, too!
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 775 (view)
 
Are 21st century, western women intimidating?
Posted: 6/11/2015 12:43:23 PM

but for purposes of dating and on here? How do you weed through the wimmins and come to a consensus?


For "dating online" purposes, I go by what they say in their profile - following the old saying, "when someone tells you who/what they are, believe them"!. Half of women are below-average intelligence wise, but you'll never get a thank-you from that half for letting them know that, right? :)


What the conclusion seems to be for some of the men here (who clearly have HUGE issues with women in general) is that no matter WHAT she likes...the tall "he will take care of me " type of guy or the bad boy biker dude, she's f*cked up.


The same rule goes for that stuff too - the women (or men) that really ARE kind of f*cked up, rarely thank you for pointing out their inclusion in that demographic. It's always hard to know if the obvious trolls are f'ed in general, or just f'ed in the sense that they enjoy jerking your chains...but clearly some of those responding to them are a bit f'ed in their own right.


I tried to be clear in stating that it was SOME men, and men on this forum, specifically. Out in the "real world" I don't run into this sort of limited box-like way of thinking.


Most of us don't - then again, I'd imagine most of us don't engage in debates or these kinds of discussions with the other gender out in the real world much - otherwise, we might!
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 757 (view)
 
Are 21st century, western women intimidating?
Posted: 6/11/2015 9:47:52 AM

I totally admit to falling for "meek" women who come across as sweet and hell ya - big boobs and blonde hair trump intelligence every time......lol....... Hey - at least I admit to this!! On the other hand, how is this any different than most women falling for the bad-boy biker type dude all covered in tattoos?


I like to think of it as "maybe there really IS someone for everyone"! It wouldn't work for me - I'd go for the Maria Bartiromo type over the Pamela Anderson type any day of the week, but - more people probably know who Pamela is than Maria.


What ever happened to being smart enough to not be so damn ambitious and balance the priorities between love, life and career?


A-freaking-men to that. And this goes not just for women. I was the a-typical Dad; my work hours let me be "Mr Mom" half of the time; and my relationship with my daughter benefited from that. When I got divorced, I ended up taking over the role of primary custodial parent. My career/salary likely suffered some from my choices, but I'm OK with that. I compare that to my brother-in-law; he was the prototypical 50's-Dad; work was his domain, the kids were Mom's job. He ended up as a VP at a major financial firm, making in the neighborhood of $500K/yr. When they got divorced, the kids didn't have much of a relationship with him, and wanted little/nothing to do with him. Of course, we both ended up divorced.


Building attraction is key and without the man having an element of mystery to his game it's very hard indeed to get the woman thinking about him and being attracted to him...


Someone's been reading way too much David DeAngelo :D
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 731 (view)
 
Are 21st century, western women intimidating?
Posted: 6/10/2015 8:18:37 PM

Will it hurt?


Only if you tense up.
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 724 (view)
 
Are 21st century, western women intimidating?
Posted: 6/10/2015 6:59:13 PM

I don't know for sure, but I wouldn't think that anyone here can really get someone's profile deleted, nor that any reporting would gain much attention.


You'd be surprised - at least in the not-so-distant-past - I've had comments I've made get reported by some who were, shall I say, "easily offended and inclined to pursue Justice"(?) and was warned about it.
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 717 (view)
 
Are 21st century, western women intimidating?
Posted: 6/10/2015 2:36:03 PM

http://eljavi.com/shows/


Not bad! :) Ever heard of this one - you might like her too (she's my favorite):
http://www.anavidovic.com/html/home.html
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 713 (view)
 
Are 21st century, western women intimidating?
Posted: 6/10/2015 2:12:01 PM

I agree with all of this, and I also wish I didn't care about smarts so much. It really does drastically limit the dating pool.


It really does -- I'm in the same boat in that area. I've found that widening the age-range I'll date has helped, because I don't know that I could successfully widen the "smarts" area as much. If you can't be flexible in one area, you need to find a way to be flexible in others.

I had to laugh at the part in the article that said:

"The popular saying “ignorance is bliss” doesn’t exactly cover the broad spectrum of woes women feel as they sit alone Friday nights with no one to discuss Nietzsche or read lines from Proust with."
and
"Why don’t men want women with whom they can converse and who challenge them? When did the aversion to strong and intelligent women become a code orange? When did everyone just want to go to the Bahamas and lie around?"


Because I've had several women tell me my profile is too complicated and I need to "keep it simple" to cast a wider net. (I didn't have the heart to tell them it was intentionally that way so as to NOT catch the wrong things, since they were part of that) And I don't see many women's profiles asking to discuss Nietzsche, but I see lots having laundry lists of places they want to travel.
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 707 (view)
 
Are 21st century, western women intimidating?
Posted: 6/10/2015 11:29:06 AM

Again, from a "3rd party observer" I find it interesting that this subject has gone from the social, educational and economic success of many 21st century western women, to rape and the politics of rape.


What's "between the lines" and the twisted paths these things take are usually WAY more interesting than the topics themselves.

If there is one thing true about a lot of singles in online dating, it's that we spend a far greater amount of time saying 'No' than we ever say 'Yes'. The 'intimidation' factor lies between our own two ears, not from how the rest of the world works.


This is SOO true - a few years back when I opened up my "ranges" a bit (I'd add "age" to your list) I found my experience to be much better (although mostly meeting people out and about, not online).
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 680 (view)
 
Are 21st century, western women intimidating?
Posted: 6/10/2015 12:05:05 AM
At the risk of hjiacking this thread back to the original topic:

http://elitedaily.com/women/intelligent-women-likely-single/678309/

I don't know if this is the inspiration for this thread originally or not, but it fits the topic well - thoughts?
 Your_Move
Joined: 11/12/2009
Msg: 678 (view)
 
Are 21st century, western women intimidating?
Posted: 6/9/2015 8:01:42 PM

Invent a consent kit that also has a breathalizer type monitor, a promissory note of some type indicating blood alcohol of each parties, checkboxes for pertinent information, condoms, whatever. And everyone has to wear this kit strapped on their body somewhere, perhaps like a fanny pack.

That should keep people from doing stupid sh1t lol.


I know - how about a new brand of chastity belt that has either a breathalizer-required-unlocking-mechanism - or - a different take on laptop computers fingerprint-scan-locks, how about a voice-recognition-lock that is set to a recording of the owners' voice saying, "I consent", in a clear, undrunken/unslurred voice, and unless she can match that, it won't unlock? Who says there aren't new markets and new inventions waiting to be....ummm..."tapped"?
 
Show ALL Forums