So, I was watching

Tryp, I really hope you have more kids. I love the idea of you raising the next generation. You're making the world a better place one child (and one post) at a time.

thanks again mirk.
actually, another little one might be in the makings, and if not, will be soon enough.

What I would really love is if you became a teacher. Maybe junior high. Instill a love for critical thinking, literature and intellectual freedom in those buggers while they're young.

no teaching here. i have no respect for teachers (as a generalization). i mean, is it too much to ask that the teacher have accurate information to pass along to the children?
ie.(a teacher i once had)"remember, if you're confronted by a bear, run down hill. bears can't run downhill because they're top-heavy." -that from a 4th grade teacher. i kind of hope someday she finds out first-hand that what she told us is not the truth.
that and i don't do well in front of crowds.

So, trpyd, what do you do for a living then, if it's not expunging your knowledge upon others?

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by mirkah [/i]
[B]Instill a love for critical thinking, literature and intellectual freedom in those buggers while they're young. [/B][/QUOTE]

Fat fucking chance, love.

every generatoin hates the next

i will save the millions from a slow insufferable death

awwwwww shit

generation*

Sure, every generation may have been raised by women, tryp, but don't discount the part about feminism.
As I have mentioned before, feminism has caused men to be weaker, more self-indulgent, more "in touch with their feelings". And thereby levying more power to women.
Fuck that. That's what men [i]are[/i]. We're tough (or try to be). How are you supposed to support a family if you're going moping about how shitty your life is or if you're afraid of everything? Suck it up, sport. I want the warriors back. The stoics.
These are men who gets things done.
Because, regardless of what stupid fucking femmies say, men's bodies are naturally stronger than women's.
We go out to a fight a fucking WAR for you, with dead bodies and blood and destruction everywhere, and you're trying to tell me I'm not respecting your goddamn [i]rights[/i]? You want to fight on the front line?
Wouldn't last a second, bitch.

So, to launch this in a new direction, should women be allowed to fight on the front lines?

yes, aurelius, women are equal to men. i'm not saying that their bodies are meant for the same purpose, but you have to understand that the world thrives on balance. men and women are a part of this balance. did it ever occur to you that feminism has nothing to do with the weakening?
perhaps it is the fact that the world is moving to urbinization that is making men less of fighters and more introspective. men don't need to be out all day hunting down dinner for their families, they don't need to protect their property in the same manner they used to. now there are specialized jobs, people that do all that for them. men have more time on their hands to think about themselves and their feelings.
and i ask you aurelius, is that so bad? are you afraid that you might actually have to come to peace with yourself instead of just smacking some woman around?
go back to the roots of religion, back to paganism. the woman played an important part in paganism. it was organized religion that made women subserviant, specifically the christian/roman catholic religious traditions that really fought the idea of equality among sexes. think of that the next time you start to preach on women's rights, that all you are doing by arguing the way you are is fueling the roman catholic ideals.

mysogyny has been done to death on this board. get over it, people.

Auri is actually venting his anger at the Industrial Revolution and its aftermath.

I should have realized this post was moved here, i just thought it dissappeared by all the posting going on.

"feminism has nothing to do with the weakening?"

hmm, so how do you explain nice guys? It was the role of women throughout the years to teach young boys how to treat women, then suddenly, it was progress to the point where men are trying to meet women's satisfactions. Or did we suddenly feel soo bad for all the opression throughout so many years that suddenly a generation of nice gentlemen took upon themselves to say sorry, what would you like us to do? Is it not the fact that women who are now working along side us another reason for our economic weakening, beside immigration and poor politicians, wouldn't there be more jobs if perhaps women just stayed home? This is just a response and don't think that i'm trying to support anti-women movement or anything else you're bored little head might want to assosciate me with.

And yes, it's true each era seemed to have been raised by women, but why does it seem that each questioned asked leads to an answer in the past, when clearly even on tyler's quote "we our a GENERATION (not generations) raised by women. I think women seemed to gain and have more power during the 1900s then whatever other era you want to compare it to.

you're saying working women = economic weakening?
yea, there would be more jobs if women just stayed home, but oddly enough that would be true if the men just stayed home too. what about single mothers? are they supposed to do without? how about women who don't want to marry? because women have the same choices now that men have had for years, and have the decision what to do with their lives, rather than have it decided for them (by a husband or father), you think that's causing poor economic conditions? no, the economic conditions in our country and many others is not the fault of any gender, race or religion, rather it is a result of democracy. democracy is set up to give chances, not promise enough for everyone. if you want that, if you want "good" economic conditions like your expecting, try setting up communism or socialism again.
how do i explain nice guys? where did this come from? you seem to think that every male from previous generations were just assholes? you can't be serious to say that the reasoning you're giving me is based on the fact that you think there are more nice guys now, and that if women didn't work, there would be more jobs available.

No, you're taking my statement to the extreme. I'm clearly pointing out that feminism did have some sort of impact on the weakening the economy plain and simple. I'm proving that your statement "feminism has nothing to do with economic weakening" is untrue.

Women making choices? that's a whole other ball game, we'll discuss that some other time-though it involves feminism, it's just going a different direction.

Democracy as you mentioned it doesn't make promises but chances, but it's the loopholes that the people discover that weaken's the economy? And not once did I mentioned gender, race, religion in my statement, all except feminism, but rather groups like imigrants (illegal) and i'll add another Criminals, they've found loops in the system that have allowed it to weakened.

Let me explain to you about NG, in my own theory, and i'll include your era's just make this fun, it'll be long so read it if you're up to it.

During early times men were use to working along side their fathers, uncles, cousin; any type of male model basically, but that soon change after the american revolution, after the civil war, while men where out fighting wars, mom played both roles that much like now, single mom's are doing, raising a young boy and (i'm not saying this was done on purpose) teaching him how to treat a women; respect them and treat them with compassion ( no complaints there)

our educational system had some part on telling young men how to satisfy women, how? well think about how most schools are made up of women rather then men, and during those troubled war times, the number of women as teachers were higher, teaching kids their abc's and well correcting young male's and females how to behave.

I think it's safe to say that by the vietnam war, the NG group were evolving even more since most of them protested and ran off to escape the draft (i'm sure I would have done the same) but the point is men had lost the male essence that was passed generation by generation, instead of joining the war and protecting their land and independence, and serving their country (which either way had changed dramatically then) was no longer an ideal to them.

Feminism. it is feminism that taught both the liberation of women, their need for respect and the right to choose, plus others; but it also projected the generalization of men, of how men are the root of all problems, that women are better off without them, and for men, who after many years (see the listed above) being taught to serve a woman's sattisfaction, this was a complete formation of a nice guy and even now women are still doing it, "men are stupid" "men think with their dicks" and other funny Epithets that make men look weak and useless. Women have gone all out to prove the world women are much better than the opposite sex, that they are equal and deserve to share the same responsibility as men. I think we've gotten the picture, yet they're still out there trying and forcing it more and more, or perhaps men are still afraid.

Now I missed out on one important key for the transformation of these "soft males"
childhood, children learn by correction, and that is exactly what has happened throughout the years, men have been corrected to stop acting macho and get in touch with their feminim side, and to stop acting like jerks and act nice to women, even defining what they have to do, yet some men have taken the meaning too far, thus my theory of a nice guy. I could add more, but by now my finger's are hurting and i'm bored with the subject. Oh and even on fight club the not so close relation tyler had with his father, and the statement "I wonder if another women is something we really need" drift a clue to us about this.

thanks for the debate.

in what manner exactly did i take your statement to the extreme? you said that is women stayed home, there would be more jobs. i agreed, i also said that if men stayed home there would be more jobs, and for that matter, if every third person born stayed home, there would be more jobs available.
ok, so you say that femenism [i]contributed[/i] to economic weakening, very well, what hasn't contributed to economic weakening? you're whole argument is based upon supposition of some things, and the exclusion of others, based on your own person views of what is relevant and what is not.
your whole nice guys theory is an interesting thought, but unfortunately, you have not back it up with any fact, or for that matter anything that would support your theory, other than it being how your percieved it to be.
you say that men are weak due to lack of war experiance, due to a lack of working alongside their fathers and brothers, due to the continuing equilization of male and female power in america. females have no more power than males, yes they get preferential treatment with the government when it come to things like employment and such, but so do people of race, and those who are handicapped. the thought behind that (from the governmental perspective) is that by helping those who were tossed aside in the past, eventually they will be percieved as equal and treated accordingly in the future.
"Oh and even on fight club the not so close relation tyler had with his father, and the statement "I wonder if another women is something we really need" drift a clue to us about this." yes, that is what brought this conversation to this point, it is what began this thread. you speak of generalizations of men, yet you exclude the generalizations about women. sexually active/inactive females are either slutty or frigid, the expression "dumb broad" comes to mind, "bitch" is not often used in reference to a male, and other "Epithets" to make women look like objects, posessions, and to seem useless.
you're welcome for the debate.

Okay extreme is a big word to use and i'm constantly doing this, but anyways, you did try and take this on another level, In what manner, well when you introduced how women have the right to choose, have more rights, and husband or father's don't control every part of their lives anymore.

So we both agreed, that if either side just stayed home more jobs would be available. let us not talk about that anymore.

I didn't exclude anything else when it came to economic weakening, if I did it was because I was merely focusing on just YOUR statement about feminism, and if you want to hold that against me you're just as guilty as I am for excluding other things that don't cause economic weakening.

What fact's do you speak of? did I not mention history or is that not consider facts anymore? did I not mentioned our educational system, wars, the absence of fathers and the responsibilities mother's had to deal with, did I not say that children have a way of learning by correction? Didn't you do something wrong and your mother or father yelled at you, did you not learn not do it again? Perhaps you did or didn't, but either way it eventually sank in. This theory very well applies to women, well I hope it does anyway, for there wouldn't be women out there as gaulable as men, and if I didn't mentioned the generalization of women it's because I was once again just focusing on the nice guy theory, nothing else, it would have been different if I said the weakeness of both male and females. Maybe i'm not going into full details about it because I don't want to post a long ass post, i made my theory as brief as possible.

well i'm done with this, but i'll leave it to you to add your last say so. by now it's just you and me talking about this hehe.

clearly neither one of us can mention every last thing that causes weakening, but i did provide several other examples, rather than excluding everything but feminization.
and no, you did not provide any facts, what you did on the other hand was toss out a vague generalization of a few eras in american history to justify your theory. i'm saying that yes, you did mention history, but that where you stopped, you did not give anything more than a sentence to discuss an entire era. they say you can justify anything with just one line out of a bible, the same can be true for history, take a single example from an era, and you can justify any theory you might have.
thanks for the discussion, and i promise, we're not the only ones reading this, so it counts for something right?

actually, nice women was a patriarchical creation of the 19th century and the Cult of Femininity. women were by no means equal before then, but it wasn't until the victorian age that women were assigned any attributes of weakness, purity, delicacy, nurturing, or gentleness.

women of the middle ages were a far cry from that image. let's not forget that one of the greatest rulers of the tudor age was a woman.

who assigned them that role?

men. and men's society.

and now you're saying women have made men weak. that's rich.

tryp
right

oh insomniac you're a bit late on the discussion. we officially killed it. good day.

it is not killed, you're just opting out.

to be honest. i'm just straight lazy. I'll respond when i'm full of energy.

you don't have to post. opting out is not forfeit. and your opting out does not mean this thread will stop.

I was raised by tvs.
Yeppers