Women are feminine. Without them, there is famine in men's life.
What are characteristics of men who are like women?
When a men loses his "manhood", he is said to become a woman.
There is then a famine in his malehood. And Famine malehood is disliked by most females.
The F word.
Effeminacy
Effeminacy is a trait in males that generally contradicts traditional male (masculine) gender roles.
It is a derogatory term frequently applied to femininity; or womanly behavior, demeanor, and appearance displayed by a man, typically used implying criticism or ridicule of this behavior (as opposed to, for example, merely describing a man as feminine, which is more neutral). The term effeminate is most often used by people who subscribe to the conventional view that men should conform to traditional masculine traits and behaviors. Generally, the description is applied to individuals, but may be used to describe entire societies as an inflammatory allegation. Although in the Western tradition, as described below, effeminacy has often been considered a vice, indicative of other negative character traits and often involving a pejorative insinuation of homosexual tendencies, in other societies men who do not conform to male gender roles may have a special social function, as is the case of Two-Spirits in some Native American groups. Furthermore, in contemporary culture, effeminacy has come to be seen by some to be simply one characteristic or trait which might be a part of a particular person's "gender role", and in this sense would not be considered a vice or indicative of any other characteristics. An effeminate man is similar to a fop or a dandy, though these tend to be archaic identities that are taken on by the individual rather than insulting labels.
In most cultures, effeminacy was traditionally considered, if not a vice, at least a weakness, indicative of other negative character traits and more recently often involving a negative insinuation of homosexual tendencies.
The definition of what constitutes effeminate behavior varies greatly depending on the social and cultural context, as well as on the time period. While some effeminate behavior evokes impressions of homosexuality in some people, others may simply view the behavior as "unmanly" without questioning the sexual orientation of the person in question.
Examples of behavior noncompliant with conventional masculinity have included:
Interest in women's fashion.
Discussing personal feelings and emotions with other males.
Speaking in a high voice, possibly with a lisp.
Cross-dressing or use of makeup.
There is a definite prejudice towards men who use femininity as part of their palate; their emotional palate, their physical palate. Is that changing? It’s changing in ways that don’t advance the cause of femininity. I’m not talking frilly-laced pink things or Hello Kitty stuff. I’m talking about goddess energy, intuition and feelings. That is still under attack, and it has gotten worse.
Effeminacy comes from the Latin, ex which is "out," and femina which means woman; it means "to be like a woman." The Latin term is mollities, meaning "softness."
The word effete similarly means effeminacy or over-refinement, but comes from the Latin effetus, from ex- + fetus (fruitful).
In ancient Koine Greek, the word for effeminate is kinaidos (cinaedus in its Latinized form), a man "whose most salient feature was a supposedly "feminine" love of being sexually penetrated by other men."
"A cinaedus is a man who cross-dresses or flirts like a girl. Indeed, the word's etymology suggests an indirect sexual act emenating a promisculous woman. This term has been borrowed from the Greek kinaidos, primarily signifying a purely effeminate dancer who entertained his audiences with a tympanum or tambourine in his hand, and adopted a lascivious style, often suggestively wiggling his buttocks in such a way as to suggest anal intercourse....The primary meaning of cinaedus never died out; the term never became a dead metaphor."
Other contemporary words for effeminacy include: "pansy", "nelly", "pretty boy", "pussy", and "girl" (when applied to a boy or, especially, adult man).
Being friends with women, having limp or loose wrists, a high and/or lispy voice, a swaying walk, occupations such as hairdressing, and hobbies and interests such as theater, musicals, or "domestic" activities such as design, sewing, or cleaning, are all often considered effeminate within various contexts.
Sissy
Because of its origins in a feminine nickname, sissy is also a pejorative for a boy or man to indicate or imply that he is like a sister, that is, effeminate and fails to behave according to the traditional male gender role. Generally, it implies a lack of the courage and stoicism which are thought important to the male role. It might also imply interests seen as strikingly un-masculine. This pejorative may be given to anyone as an insult. Several variations, such as "sissy boy" or "sissy baby", exist and any term can become pejorative or insulting if preceded by "sissy" and applied to a boy or a man.
Other similar terms include "wimp", "wuss" and "femboy".
See internet encyclopedia - Wikipedia
Comment: Women hold girly men in contempt. Only real men are respected. Ladies do not actually respect an idiot whom women can place under their thumb. Efs are undesirable by most girls.
2008
Showing posts with label sissymen. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sissymen. Show all posts
Tuesday
Women still look for a Real Man
-
Research shows that, although most women tolerate sissy boys, what they still really seek is real men.
British newspaper - The Sunday Times:
Where have all the "Real Men" gone?
Top American columnist Kathleen Parker is causing a furore with her new book "Save the Males", in which she argues that feminism has neutered men and deprived them of their noble, protective role in society
I know. Saving the males is an unlikely vocation for a 21st-century woman. Most men don’t know they need saving; most women consider the idea absurd. When I tell my women friends that I want to save the males, they look at me as if noticing for the first time that I am insane. Then they say something like: “Are you out of your mind? This is still a male-dominated world. It’s women who need saving. Screw the men!”
Actually, that’s a direct quote. The reality is that men already have been screwed – and not in the way they prefer. For the past 30 years or so, males have been under siege by a culture that too often embraces the notion that men are to blame for all of life’s ills. Males as a group – not random men – are bad by virtue of their DNA.
While women have been cast as victims, martyrs, mystics or saints, men have quietly retreated into their caves, the better to muffle emotions that fluctuate between hilarity (are these bitches crazy or what?) and rage (yes, they are and they’ve got our kids).
In the process of fashioning a more female-friendly world, we have created a culture that is hostile towards males, contemptuous of masculinity and cynical about the delightful differences that make men irresistible, especially when something goes bump in the night.
In popular culture, rare is the man portrayed as wise, strong and noble. In film and music, men are variously portrayed as dolts, bullies, brutes, deadbeats, rapists, sexual predators and wife-beaters. Even otherwise easy-going family men in sitcoms are invariably cast as, at best, bumbling, dim-witted fools. One would assume from most depictions that the smart, decent man who cares about his family and pats the neighbour’s dog is the exception rather than the rule.
I am frankly an unlikely champion of males and that most hackneyed cliché of our times – “traditional family values”. Or rather, I’m an expert on family in the same way that the captain of the Titanic was an expert on maritime navigation.
Looking back affectionately, I like to think of home as our own little Baghdad. The bunker-buster was my mother’s death when she was 31 and I was three, whereupon my father became a serial husband, launching into the holy state of matrimony four more times throughout my childhood and early adulthood. We were dysfunctional before dysfunctional was cool.
Going against trends of the day, I was mostly an only child raised by a single father through all but one of my teen years, with mother figures in various cameo roles. I got a close-up glimpse of how the sexes trouble and fail each other and in the process developed great em-pathy for both, but especially for men.
Although my father could be difficult – I wasn’t blinded by his considerable charms – I also could see his struggle and the sorrows he suffered, especially after mother No 2 left with his youngest daughter, my little sister.
From this broad, experiential education in the ways of men and women, I reached a helpful conclusion that seems to have escaped notice by some of my fellow sisters: men are human beings, too.
Lest anyone infer that my defence of men is driven by antipathy towards women, let me take a moment to point out that I liked and/or loved all my mothers. In fact, I’m still close to all my father’s wives except the last, who is just a few years older than me and who is apparently afraid that if we make eye contact, I’ll want the silver. (I do.)
My further education in matters male transpired in the course of raising three boys, my own and two stepsons. As a result of my total immersion in male-dom, I’ve been cursed with guy vision – and it’s not looking so good out there.
At the same time that men have been ridiculed, the importance of fatherhood has been diminished, along with other traditionally male roles of father, protector and provider, which are increasingly viewed as regressive manifestations of an outmoded patriarchy.
The exemplar of the modern male is the hairless, metrosexualised man and decorator boys who turn heter-osexual slobs into perfumed ponies. All of which is fine as long as we can dwell happily in the Kingdom of Starbucks, munching our biscotti and debating whether nature or nurture determines gender identity. But in the dangerous world in which we really live, it might be nice to have a few guys around who aren’t trying to juggle pedicures and highlights.
Men have been domesticated to within an inch of their lives, attending Lamaze classes, counting contractions, bottling expressed breast milk for midnight feedings – I expect men to start lactating before I finish this sentence – yet they are treated most unfairly in the areas of reproduction and parenting.
Legally, women hold the cards. If a woman gets pregnant, she can abort – even without her husband’s consent. If she chooses to have the child, she gets a baby and the man gets an invoice. Unarguably, a man should support his offspring, but by that same logic shouldn’t he have a say in whether his child is born or aborted?
Granted, many men are all too grateful for women to handle the collateral damage of poorly planned romantic interludes, but that doesn’t negate the fact that many men are hurt by the presumption that their vote is irrelevant in childbearing decisions.
NOTHING quite says “Men need not apply” like a phial of mail-order sperm Continued on page 2 Continued from page 1 and a turkey-baster. In the high-tech nursery of sperm donation and self-insemination – and in the absence of shame attached to unwed motherhood – babies can now be custom-ordered without the muss and fuss of human intimacy.
It’s not fashionable to question women’s decisions, especially when it comes to childbearing, but the shame attached to unwed motherhood did serve a useful purpose once upon a time. While we have happily retired the word “bastard” and the attendant emotional pain for mother and child, acceptance of childbearing outside marriage represents not just a huge shift in attitudes but, potentially, a restructuring of the future human family.
By elevating single motherhood from an unfortunate consequence of poor planning to a sophisticated act of self-fulfilment, we have helped to fashion a world in which fathers are not just scarce but in which men are also superfluous.
Lots of women can, do and always will raise children without fathers, whether out of necessity, tragedy or other circumstance. But that fact can’t logically be construed to mean that children don’t need a father. The fact that some children manage with just one parent is no more an endorsement of single parenthood than driving with a flat tyre is an argument for three-wheeled cars.
For most of recorded history, human society has regarded the family, consisting of a child’s biological mother and father, to be the best arrangement for the child’s wellbeing and the loss of a parent to be the single greatest threat to that wellbeing. There’s bound to be a reason for this beyond the need for man to drag his woman around by her chignon.
Sperm-donor children are a relatively new addition to the human community and they bring new stories to the campfire. I interviewed several adults who are the products of sperm donation. Some were born to married but infertile couples. Others were born to single mothers. Some reported well-adjusted childhoods; some reported conflicting feelings of love and loss.
Overall, a common thread emerged that should put to rest any notion that fathers are not needed: even the happiest donor children expressed a profound need to know who their father is, to know that other part of themselves.
Tom Ellis, a mathematics doctoral student at Cambridge University, learnt at 21 that he and his brother were both donor-conceived. Their parents told them on the advice of a family therapist as their marriage unravelled.
At first Tom did not react, but months later he hit a wall of emotional devastation. He says he became numb, anxious and scared. He began a search for his biological father, a search that has become a crusade for identity common among sperm-donor children.
“It’s absolutely necessary that I find out who he is to have a normal existence as a human being. That’s not negotiable in any way,” Tom said. “It would be nice if he wanted to meet me, but that would be something I want rather than something needed.”
Tom is convinced that the need to know one’s biological father is profound and that it is also every child’s right. What is clear from conversations with donor-conceived children is that a father is neither an abstract idea nor is he interchangeable with a mother.
As Tom put it: “There’s a mystery about oneself.” Knowing one’s father is apparently crucial to that mystery.
Something that’s hard for many women to admit or understand is that after about the age of seven, boys prefer the company of men. A woman could know the secret code to Aladdin’s cave and it would be less interesting to a boy than a man talking about dirt. That is because a woman is perceived as just another mother, while a man is Man.
From their mothers, boys basically want to hear variations on two phrases: “I love you” and “Do you want those fried or scrambled?” I learnt this in no uncertain terms when I was a Cub Scout leader, which mysteriously seems to have prompted my son’s decision to abandon Scouting for ever.
My co-Akela (Cub Scout for wolf leader) was Dr Judy Sullivan – friend, fellow mother and clinical psychologist. Imagine the boys’ excitement when they learnt who would be leading them in guy pursuits: a reporter and a shrink – two intense, overachieving, helicopter mothers of only boys. Shouldn’t there be a law against this?
We had our boys’ best interests at heart, of course, and did our utmost to be good den mothers. But seven-year-old boys are not interested in making lanterns from coffee tins. They want to shoot bows and arrows, preferably at one another, chop wood with stone-hewn axes and sink canoes, preferably while in them.
At the end of a school day, during which they have been steeped in oestrogen by women teachers and told how many “bad choices” they’ve made, boys are ready to make some really bad choices. They do not want to sit quietly and listen to yet more women speak soothingly of important things.
Here’s how one memorable meeting began. “Boys, thank you for taking your seats and being quiet while we explain our women’s history month project,” said Akela Sullivan in her calmest psychotherapist voice. The response to Akela Sullivan’s entreaty sounded something like the Zulu nation psyching up for the Brits.
I tried a different, somewhat more masculine approach: “Boys, get in here, sit down and shut up. Now!” And lo, they did get in there. And they did sit. And they did shut up. One boy stargazed into my face and stage-whispered: “I wish you were my mother.”
Akela Sullivan and I put our heads together, epiphanised in unison and decided that we would recruit transients from the homeless shelter if necessary to give these boys what they wanted and needed – men.
As luck would have it, a Cub Scout’s father was semi-retired or between jobs or something – we didn’t ask – and could attend the meetings. He didn’t have to do a thing. He just had to be there and respire testosterone vapours into the atmosphere.
His presence shifted the tectonic plates and changed the angle of the Earth on its axis. Our boys were at his command, ready to disarm landmines, to sink enemy ships – or even to sit quietly for the sake of the unit if he of the gravelly voice and sandpaper face wished it so. I suspect they would have found coffee tins brilliantly useful as lanterns if he had suggested as much.
But, of course, boys don’t stay Cub Scouts for long. We’ve managed over the past 20 years or so to create a new generation of child-men, perpetual adolescents who see no point in growing up. By indulging every appetite instead of recognising the importance of self-control and commitment, we’ve ratified the id.
Our society’s young men encounter little resistance against continuing to celebrate juvenile pursuits, losing themselves in video games and mindless, “guy-oriented” TV fare – and casual sex.
The casual sex culture prevalent on university campuses – and even in schools – has produced fresh vocabulary to accommodate new ways of relating: “friends with benefits” and “booty call”.
FWB I get, but “booty call”? I had to ask a young friend, who explained: “Oh, that’s when a guy calls you up and just needs you to come over and have sex with him and then go home.”
Why, I asked, would a girl do such a thing? Why would she service a man for nothing – no relationship, no affection, no emotional intimacy?
She pointed out that, well, they are friends. With benefits! But no obligations! Cool. When I persisted in demanding an answer to “why”, she finally shrugged and said: “I have no idea. It’s dumb.”
Guys also have no idea why a girl would do that, but they’re not complaining – even if they’re not enjoying themselves that much, either.
Miriam Grossman, a university psychiatrist, wrote Unprotected, a book about the consequences of casual sex among students. She has treated thousands of young men and women suffering a range of physical and emotional problems related to sex, which she blames on sex education of recent years that treats sex as though it were divorced from emotional attachment and as if men and women were the same. Grossman asserts that there are a lot more victims of the hookup (casual sex) culture than of date rape.
Casual sex, besides being emotionally unrewarding, can become physically boring. Once sex is stripped of meaning, it becomes merely a mechanical exercise. Since the hookup generation is also the porn generation, many have taken their performance cues from porn flicks that are anything but sensual or caring.
Boys today are marinating in pornography and they’ll soon be having casual sex with our daughters. According to a study by the National Foundation for Educational Research issued in 2005, 12% of British males aged 13-18 avail themselves of “adult-only” websites; and American research findings are similar. The actual numbers are likely to be much higher, given the amount of porn spam that finds its way into electronic mailboxes. If the rising generation of young men have trouble viewing the opposite sex as anything but an object for sexual gratification, we can’t pretend not to understand why.
The biggest problem for both sexes – beyond the epidemic of sexually transmitted disease – is that casual sex is essentially an adversarial enterprise that pits men and women against each other. Some young women, now fully as sexually aggressive as men, have taken “liberation” to another level by acting as badly as the worst guy.
Carol Platt Liebau, the author of Prude, another book on the havoc that pervasive sex has on young people, says that when girls begin behaving more coarsely so, too, do boys.
“And now, because so many young girls have been told that it’s ‘empowering’ to pursue boys aggressively, there’s no longer any need for boys to ‘woo’ girls – or even to commit to a date,” she told me. “The girls are available [in every sense of the word] and the boys know it.”
Men, meanwhile, have feelings. Although they’re uncomfortable sorting through them – and generally won’t if no one insists – I’ve listened to enough of them to know that our hypersexualised world has left many feeling limp and vacant.
Our cultural assumption that men only want sex has been as damaging to them as to the women they target. Here is how a recent graduate summed it up to me: “Hooking up is great, but at some point you get tired of everything meaning nothing.”
Ultimately, what our oversexualised, pornified culture reveals is that we think very little of our male family members. Undergirding the culture that feminism has helped to craft is a presumption that men are without honour and integrity. What we offer men is cheap, dirty, sleazy, manipulative sensation. What we expect from them is boorish, simian behaviour that ratifies the antimale sentiment that runs through the culture.
Surely our boys – and our girls – deserve better.
As long as men feel marginalised by the women whose favours and approval they seek; as long as they are alienated from their children and treated as criminals by family courts; as long as they are disrespected by a culture that no longer values masculinity tied to honour; and as long as boys are bereft of strong fathers and our young men and women wage sexual war, then we risk cultural suicide.
In the coming years we will need men who are not confused about their responsibilities. We need boys who have acquired the virtues of honour, courage, valour and loyalty. We need women willing to let men be men – and boys be boys. And we need young men and women who will commit and marry and raise children in stable homes.
Unprogressive though it sounds, the world in which we live requires no less.
Saving the males – engaging their nobility and recognising their unique strengths – will ultimately benefit women and children, too. Fewer will live in poverty; fewer boys will fail in schools and wind up in jail; fewer girls will get pregnant or suffer emotional damage from too early sex with uncaring boys. Fewer young men and women will suffer loneliness and loss because they’ve grown up in a climate of sexual hostility that casts the opposite sex as either villain or victim.
Then again, maybe I’m completely wrong. Maybe males don’t need saving and women are never happier or more liberated than when dancing with a stripper pole. Maybe women should man the barricades and men should warm the milk. Maybe men are not necessary and women can manage just fine without them. Maybe human nature has been nurtured into submission and males and females are completely interchangeable.
But I don’t think so. When women say, “No, honey, you stay in bed. I’ll go see what that noise is” – I’ll reconsider.
"Save the Males: Why Men Matter, Why Women Should Care", by Kathleen Parker
Comment: Miss Parker is blaming women for existence of pussies. Its not true. A real man would never turn into a sissy. Its that man who is ALREADY a sissy, that transforms into a pussy.
2008
-
Research shows that, although most women tolerate sissy boys, what they still really seek is real men.
British newspaper - The Sunday Times:
Where have all the "Real Men" gone?
Top American columnist Kathleen Parker is causing a furore with her new book "Save the Males", in which she argues that feminism has neutered men and deprived them of their noble, protective role in society
I know. Saving the males is an unlikely vocation for a 21st-century woman. Most men don’t know they need saving; most women consider the idea absurd. When I tell my women friends that I want to save the males, they look at me as if noticing for the first time that I am insane. Then they say something like: “Are you out of your mind? This is still a male-dominated world. It’s women who need saving. Screw the men!”
Actually, that’s a direct quote. The reality is that men already have been screwed – and not in the way they prefer. For the past 30 years or so, males have been under siege by a culture that too often embraces the notion that men are to blame for all of life’s ills. Males as a group – not random men – are bad by virtue of their DNA.
While women have been cast as victims, martyrs, mystics or saints, men have quietly retreated into their caves, the better to muffle emotions that fluctuate between hilarity (are these bitches crazy or what?) and rage (yes, they are and they’ve got our kids).
In the process of fashioning a more female-friendly world, we have created a culture that is hostile towards males, contemptuous of masculinity and cynical about the delightful differences that make men irresistible, especially when something goes bump in the night.
In popular culture, rare is the man portrayed as wise, strong and noble. In film and music, men are variously portrayed as dolts, bullies, brutes, deadbeats, rapists, sexual predators and wife-beaters. Even otherwise easy-going family men in sitcoms are invariably cast as, at best, bumbling, dim-witted fools. One would assume from most depictions that the smart, decent man who cares about his family and pats the neighbour’s dog is the exception rather than the rule.
I am frankly an unlikely champion of males and that most hackneyed cliché of our times – “traditional family values”. Or rather, I’m an expert on family in the same way that the captain of the Titanic was an expert on maritime navigation.
Looking back affectionately, I like to think of home as our own little Baghdad. The bunker-buster was my mother’s death when she was 31 and I was three, whereupon my father became a serial husband, launching into the holy state of matrimony four more times throughout my childhood and early adulthood. We were dysfunctional before dysfunctional was cool.
Going against trends of the day, I was mostly an only child raised by a single father through all but one of my teen years, with mother figures in various cameo roles. I got a close-up glimpse of how the sexes trouble and fail each other and in the process developed great em-pathy for both, but especially for men.
Although my father could be difficult – I wasn’t blinded by his considerable charms – I also could see his struggle and the sorrows he suffered, especially after mother No 2 left with his youngest daughter, my little sister.
From this broad, experiential education in the ways of men and women, I reached a helpful conclusion that seems to have escaped notice by some of my fellow sisters: men are human beings, too.
Lest anyone infer that my defence of men is driven by antipathy towards women, let me take a moment to point out that I liked and/or loved all my mothers. In fact, I’m still close to all my father’s wives except the last, who is just a few years older than me and who is apparently afraid that if we make eye contact, I’ll want the silver. (I do.)
My further education in matters male transpired in the course of raising three boys, my own and two stepsons. As a result of my total immersion in male-dom, I’ve been cursed with guy vision – and it’s not looking so good out there.
At the same time that men have been ridiculed, the importance of fatherhood has been diminished, along with other traditionally male roles of father, protector and provider, which are increasingly viewed as regressive manifestations of an outmoded patriarchy.
The exemplar of the modern male is the hairless, metrosexualised man and decorator boys who turn heter-osexual slobs into perfumed ponies. All of which is fine as long as we can dwell happily in the Kingdom of Starbucks, munching our biscotti and debating whether nature or nurture determines gender identity. But in the dangerous world in which we really live, it might be nice to have a few guys around who aren’t trying to juggle pedicures and highlights.
Men have been domesticated to within an inch of their lives, attending Lamaze classes, counting contractions, bottling expressed breast milk for midnight feedings – I expect men to start lactating before I finish this sentence – yet they are treated most unfairly in the areas of reproduction and parenting.
Legally, women hold the cards. If a woman gets pregnant, she can abort – even without her husband’s consent. If she chooses to have the child, she gets a baby and the man gets an invoice. Unarguably, a man should support his offspring, but by that same logic shouldn’t he have a say in whether his child is born or aborted?
Granted, many men are all too grateful for women to handle the collateral damage of poorly planned romantic interludes, but that doesn’t negate the fact that many men are hurt by the presumption that their vote is irrelevant in childbearing decisions.
NOTHING quite says “Men need not apply” like a phial of mail-order sperm Continued on page 2 Continued from page 1 and a turkey-baster. In the high-tech nursery of sperm donation and self-insemination – and in the absence of shame attached to unwed motherhood – babies can now be custom-ordered without the muss and fuss of human intimacy.
It’s not fashionable to question women’s decisions, especially when it comes to childbearing, but the shame attached to unwed motherhood did serve a useful purpose once upon a time. While we have happily retired the word “bastard” and the attendant emotional pain for mother and child, acceptance of childbearing outside marriage represents not just a huge shift in attitudes but, potentially, a restructuring of the future human family.
By elevating single motherhood from an unfortunate consequence of poor planning to a sophisticated act of self-fulfilment, we have helped to fashion a world in which fathers are not just scarce but in which men are also superfluous.
Lots of women can, do and always will raise children without fathers, whether out of necessity, tragedy or other circumstance. But that fact can’t logically be construed to mean that children don’t need a father. The fact that some children manage with just one parent is no more an endorsement of single parenthood than driving with a flat tyre is an argument for three-wheeled cars.
For most of recorded history, human society has regarded the family, consisting of a child’s biological mother and father, to be the best arrangement for the child’s wellbeing and the loss of a parent to be the single greatest threat to that wellbeing. There’s bound to be a reason for this beyond the need for man to drag his woman around by her chignon.
Sperm-donor children are a relatively new addition to the human community and they bring new stories to the campfire. I interviewed several adults who are the products of sperm donation. Some were born to married but infertile couples. Others were born to single mothers. Some reported well-adjusted childhoods; some reported conflicting feelings of love and loss.
Overall, a common thread emerged that should put to rest any notion that fathers are not needed: even the happiest donor children expressed a profound need to know who their father is, to know that other part of themselves.
Tom Ellis, a mathematics doctoral student at Cambridge University, learnt at 21 that he and his brother were both donor-conceived. Their parents told them on the advice of a family therapist as their marriage unravelled.
At first Tom did not react, but months later he hit a wall of emotional devastation. He says he became numb, anxious and scared. He began a search for his biological father, a search that has become a crusade for identity common among sperm-donor children.
“It’s absolutely necessary that I find out who he is to have a normal existence as a human being. That’s not negotiable in any way,” Tom said. “It would be nice if he wanted to meet me, but that would be something I want rather than something needed.”
Tom is convinced that the need to know one’s biological father is profound and that it is also every child’s right. What is clear from conversations with donor-conceived children is that a father is neither an abstract idea nor is he interchangeable with a mother.
As Tom put it: “There’s a mystery about oneself.” Knowing one’s father is apparently crucial to that mystery.
Something that’s hard for many women to admit or understand is that after about the age of seven, boys prefer the company of men. A woman could know the secret code to Aladdin’s cave and it would be less interesting to a boy than a man talking about dirt. That is because a woman is perceived as just another mother, while a man is Man.
From their mothers, boys basically want to hear variations on two phrases: “I love you” and “Do you want those fried or scrambled?” I learnt this in no uncertain terms when I was a Cub Scout leader, which mysteriously seems to have prompted my son’s decision to abandon Scouting for ever.
My co-Akela (Cub Scout for wolf leader) was Dr Judy Sullivan – friend, fellow mother and clinical psychologist. Imagine the boys’ excitement when they learnt who would be leading them in guy pursuits: a reporter and a shrink – two intense, overachieving, helicopter mothers of only boys. Shouldn’t there be a law against this?
We had our boys’ best interests at heart, of course, and did our utmost to be good den mothers. But seven-year-old boys are not interested in making lanterns from coffee tins. They want to shoot bows and arrows, preferably at one another, chop wood with stone-hewn axes and sink canoes, preferably while in them.
At the end of a school day, during which they have been steeped in oestrogen by women teachers and told how many “bad choices” they’ve made, boys are ready to make some really bad choices. They do not want to sit quietly and listen to yet more women speak soothingly of important things.
Here’s how one memorable meeting began. “Boys, thank you for taking your seats and being quiet while we explain our women’s history month project,” said Akela Sullivan in her calmest psychotherapist voice. The response to Akela Sullivan’s entreaty sounded something like the Zulu nation psyching up for the Brits.
I tried a different, somewhat more masculine approach: “Boys, get in here, sit down and shut up. Now!” And lo, they did get in there. And they did sit. And they did shut up. One boy stargazed into my face and stage-whispered: “I wish you were my mother.”
Akela Sullivan and I put our heads together, epiphanised in unison and decided that we would recruit transients from the homeless shelter if necessary to give these boys what they wanted and needed – men.
As luck would have it, a Cub Scout’s father was semi-retired or between jobs or something – we didn’t ask – and could attend the meetings. He didn’t have to do a thing. He just had to be there and respire testosterone vapours into the atmosphere.
His presence shifted the tectonic plates and changed the angle of the Earth on its axis. Our boys were at his command, ready to disarm landmines, to sink enemy ships – or even to sit quietly for the sake of the unit if he of the gravelly voice and sandpaper face wished it so. I suspect they would have found coffee tins brilliantly useful as lanterns if he had suggested as much.
But, of course, boys don’t stay Cub Scouts for long. We’ve managed over the past 20 years or so to create a new generation of child-men, perpetual adolescents who see no point in growing up. By indulging every appetite instead of recognising the importance of self-control and commitment, we’ve ratified the id.
Our society’s young men encounter little resistance against continuing to celebrate juvenile pursuits, losing themselves in video games and mindless, “guy-oriented” TV fare – and casual sex.
The casual sex culture prevalent on university campuses – and even in schools – has produced fresh vocabulary to accommodate new ways of relating: “friends with benefits” and “booty call”.
FWB I get, but “booty call”? I had to ask a young friend, who explained: “Oh, that’s when a guy calls you up and just needs you to come over and have sex with him and then go home.”
Why, I asked, would a girl do such a thing? Why would she service a man for nothing – no relationship, no affection, no emotional intimacy?
She pointed out that, well, they are friends. With benefits! But no obligations! Cool. When I persisted in demanding an answer to “why”, she finally shrugged and said: “I have no idea. It’s dumb.”
Guys also have no idea why a girl would do that, but they’re not complaining – even if they’re not enjoying themselves that much, either.
Miriam Grossman, a university psychiatrist, wrote Unprotected, a book about the consequences of casual sex among students. She has treated thousands of young men and women suffering a range of physical and emotional problems related to sex, which she blames on sex education of recent years that treats sex as though it were divorced from emotional attachment and as if men and women were the same. Grossman asserts that there are a lot more victims of the hookup (casual sex) culture than of date rape.
Casual sex, besides being emotionally unrewarding, can become physically boring. Once sex is stripped of meaning, it becomes merely a mechanical exercise. Since the hookup generation is also the porn generation, many have taken their performance cues from porn flicks that are anything but sensual or caring.
Boys today are marinating in pornography and they’ll soon be having casual sex with our daughters. According to a study by the National Foundation for Educational Research issued in 2005, 12% of British males aged 13-18 avail themselves of “adult-only” websites; and American research findings are similar. The actual numbers are likely to be much higher, given the amount of porn spam that finds its way into electronic mailboxes. If the rising generation of young men have trouble viewing the opposite sex as anything but an object for sexual gratification, we can’t pretend not to understand why.
The biggest problem for both sexes – beyond the epidemic of sexually transmitted disease – is that casual sex is essentially an adversarial enterprise that pits men and women against each other. Some young women, now fully as sexually aggressive as men, have taken “liberation” to another level by acting as badly as the worst guy.
Carol Platt Liebau, the author of Prude, another book on the havoc that pervasive sex has on young people, says that when girls begin behaving more coarsely so, too, do boys.
“And now, because so many young girls have been told that it’s ‘empowering’ to pursue boys aggressively, there’s no longer any need for boys to ‘woo’ girls – or even to commit to a date,” she told me. “The girls are available [in every sense of the word] and the boys know it.”
Men, meanwhile, have feelings. Although they’re uncomfortable sorting through them – and generally won’t if no one insists – I’ve listened to enough of them to know that our hypersexualised world has left many feeling limp and vacant.
Our cultural assumption that men only want sex has been as damaging to them as to the women they target. Here is how a recent graduate summed it up to me: “Hooking up is great, but at some point you get tired of everything meaning nothing.”
Ultimately, what our oversexualised, pornified culture reveals is that we think very little of our male family members. Undergirding the culture that feminism has helped to craft is a presumption that men are without honour and integrity. What we offer men is cheap, dirty, sleazy, manipulative sensation. What we expect from them is boorish, simian behaviour that ratifies the antimale sentiment that runs through the culture.
Surely our boys – and our girls – deserve better.
As long as men feel marginalised by the women whose favours and approval they seek; as long as they are alienated from their children and treated as criminals by family courts; as long as they are disrespected by a culture that no longer values masculinity tied to honour; and as long as boys are bereft of strong fathers and our young men and women wage sexual war, then we risk cultural suicide.
In the coming years we will need men who are not confused about their responsibilities. We need boys who have acquired the virtues of honour, courage, valour and loyalty. We need women willing to let men be men – and boys be boys. And we need young men and women who will commit and marry and raise children in stable homes.
Unprogressive though it sounds, the world in which we live requires no less.
Saving the males – engaging their nobility and recognising their unique strengths – will ultimately benefit women and children, too. Fewer will live in poverty; fewer boys will fail in schools and wind up in jail; fewer girls will get pregnant or suffer emotional damage from too early sex with uncaring boys. Fewer young men and women will suffer loneliness and loss because they’ve grown up in a climate of sexual hostility that casts the opposite sex as either villain or victim.
Then again, maybe I’m completely wrong. Maybe males don’t need saving and women are never happier or more liberated than when dancing with a stripper pole. Maybe women should man the barricades and men should warm the milk. Maybe men are not necessary and women can manage just fine without them. Maybe human nature has been nurtured into submission and males and females are completely interchangeable.
But I don’t think so. When women say, “No, honey, you stay in bed. I’ll go see what that noise is” – I’ll reconsider.
"Save the Males: Why Men Matter, Why Women Should Care", by Kathleen Parker
Comment: Miss Parker is blaming women for existence of pussies. Its not true. A real man would never turn into a sissy. Its that man who is ALREADY a sissy, that transforms into a pussy.
2008
-
Sissy boys pushed by women
Media gives discription of sissy boys.
Women still long for real men.
British newspaper - The Daily Mail:
Men "allowed women" to turn them into "sissies"
They must now rediscover their masculine side
R.I.P. MEN: They earn less, are "pushed around" and reduced to sex objects...
It's a subject guaranteed to provoke the fiercest of debates: whether men have been emasculated and marginalised by feminism and the march of women professionally and educationally. It's the question at the heart of a controversial new book, The Decline Of Men by Guy Garcia, which is making waves in America. So is he right?
Our columnist believes so - at least in part. Here, a leading female commentator giving her very different opinion.
It certainly says something about the dizzy new heights we've reached in bloke-bashing when a book such as The Decline Of Men could get published at all.
Imagine an author turning up with their latest manuscript containing arguments such as: 'At the dawn of the 21st century, men are not just the weaker sex, they are also fast on their way to becoming poorer, dumber, sicker, lonelier. More marginal, more unnecessary, less loved.'
Weaker sex? Say that about a woman, or call black Americans a weaker race, and you'd be rightly castigated.
But The Decline Of Men does, amid a lot of silliness about the so-called testosterone drain, contain some uncomfortable truths for our beloved brothers.
It is, for example, undeniably correct in saying that 'the classic male virtues - physical strength, aggression, self-sufficiency, resolve - that were so useful in agrarian and industrial societies, are increasingly out of date in the post-modern world where networking, co-operation and communication are key'.
Men may choose to shimmy about with their exfoliated, rehydrated skin carrying their Prada manbags and waxing their backs, but as any woman knows, such high maintenance takes a big chunk out of the working day. Looking like David Beckham is a fulltime career.
But perhaps what we should be asking is: who turned men into sissies?
The answer to that is we women. Women wilfully feminised men to make them less masculine, less challenging to our ambitions, less competition for us. We emasculated them.
As a result, we've destroyed the core of their being, their masculinity. We've led them astray and away from the very qualities we intrinsically find most attractive in a man.
We told them we loved their feminine side, then came to despise it. We convinced them we wanted to be equal breadwinners, then began to resent it.
We loved the idea of earning more than our men, more than any man, yet lost respect for them when it was us bringing home the bacon.
But men have been culpable in all this, too. Sure, we gave them a social duffing up, but they gave in to it. The feminisation process sneakily appealed to their intrinsic vanity, and sharing the career workload played to many men's innate laziness.
I disagree with Garcia when he says 'men aren't giving up - they're being run over because they're lazy and can't multi-task'.
There is nothing more energised, more vital than a man who is loved and respected for being a successful man, a provider and a father.
But partly because of the way women have systematically traduced men and their manliness, partly because of the way we as a society have feted and institutionalised single motherhood, from the council estate to the boardroom, we haven't left much for men to do or be that is unique to them.
Even the education system is now skewed against them. Garcia is correct when he says that girls are outperforming boys at school, but it's not because they are brighter or more adept at surviving in a post-modern world, but because of the liberal engineering of state education that has made it more sympathetic to girls' learning skills and less so to those of boys.
And with the huge increase in university-educated girls, there is a social timebomb ticking.
In America, over the past 25 years the number of female undergraduates has grown more than twice as fast as their male counterparts.
According to Garcia, by 2006 women outnumbered men on American college campuses by more than two million.
Again, if the tables were turned and women were wildly outnumbered today in universities and if men were overtaking their achievements, there would be an outcry.
The feminists view the current state of play in the war of the sexes as a great victory - they feel it proves they were right and that women were smarter than men all along.
But it's like two armies locked in battle, one armed with bayonets, the other with Kalashnikovs. It's not been a fair fight.
One survey Garcia cites shows that, on average, females between the ages of 21 and 30 earned 117 per cent of males' wages in the same group.
And while women's wages have soared, wages for men have declined.
'Men are not just getting poorer, they're also getting dumber,' he says. And he's right. Beneath the lip gloss of metrosexual modern male, men are in trouble.
Men of all ages are becoming increasingly 'angry, suspicious, reactionary and isolated' because women have treated the men's natural roles without respect.
Who wouldn't become reactionary when all that you knew had been demeaned, taken from you or chipped away?
Who wouldn't feel isolated when society had institutionalised fatherlessness, thus eradicating the most vital and enhancing role any man can play in his life?
Garcia goes so far as to argue that the roles have flipped so much from the way they were, say, 50 years ago - and that men have become so emasculated and feminised - that 'men are the new women'.
If that's true, and sadly it is for some men, then women have a lot to answer for. And perhaps the greatest irony is that it's us who are the losers in the end.
You show me a woman who isn't attracted by strength, success, masculinity and I'll show you a lesbian.
Garcia argues that it is 'an undeniable reality that women are poised to become the dominant gender in America, and in many ways already are'.
With men already in decline, it's only going to get worse. Deep in a recession with so many jobs at risk, a man's native, competitive provider survival spirit has never been more necessary to millions of families' survival, and yet never have these qualities been so systematically diminished.
So when we most need men to be men, we've created a disproportionate number of men who are more pussycats than lions. Perhaps the real Decline Of Men has only just begun.
Or perhaps, just perhaps, they'll throw off their Prada, ditch the pedicures, stop crying and get in touch with their masculine side again. We can only hope.
Comment: Most of the men in society have now turned into sissies. They get pushed around by women. They are not real men. Ladies still long for the real thing. They hate pussies.
2008
Women still long for real men.
British newspaper - The Daily Mail:
Men "allowed women" to turn them into "sissies"
They must now rediscover their masculine side
R.I.P. MEN: They earn less, are "pushed around" and reduced to sex objects...
It's a subject guaranteed to provoke the fiercest of debates: whether men have been emasculated and marginalised by feminism and the march of women professionally and educationally. It's the question at the heart of a controversial new book, The Decline Of Men by Guy Garcia, which is making waves in America. So is he right?
Our columnist believes so - at least in part. Here, a leading female commentator giving her very different opinion.
It certainly says something about the dizzy new heights we've reached in bloke-bashing when a book such as The Decline Of Men could get published at all.
Imagine an author turning up with their latest manuscript containing arguments such as: 'At the dawn of the 21st century, men are not just the weaker sex, they are also fast on their way to becoming poorer, dumber, sicker, lonelier. More marginal, more unnecessary, less loved.'
Weaker sex? Say that about a woman, or call black Americans a weaker race, and you'd be rightly castigated.
But The Decline Of Men does, amid a lot of silliness about the so-called testosterone drain, contain some uncomfortable truths for our beloved brothers.
It is, for example, undeniably correct in saying that 'the classic male virtues - physical strength, aggression, self-sufficiency, resolve - that were so useful in agrarian and industrial societies, are increasingly out of date in the post-modern world where networking, co-operation and communication are key'.
Men may choose to shimmy about with their exfoliated, rehydrated skin carrying their Prada manbags and waxing their backs, but as any woman knows, such high maintenance takes a big chunk out of the working day. Looking like David Beckham is a fulltime career.
But perhaps what we should be asking is: who turned men into sissies?
The answer to that is we women. Women wilfully feminised men to make them less masculine, less challenging to our ambitions, less competition for us. We emasculated them.
As a result, we've destroyed the core of their being, their masculinity. We've led them astray and away from the very qualities we intrinsically find most attractive in a man.
We told them we loved their feminine side, then came to despise it. We convinced them we wanted to be equal breadwinners, then began to resent it.
We loved the idea of earning more than our men, more than any man, yet lost respect for them when it was us bringing home the bacon.
But men have been culpable in all this, too. Sure, we gave them a social duffing up, but they gave in to it. The feminisation process sneakily appealed to their intrinsic vanity, and sharing the career workload played to many men's innate laziness.
I disagree with Garcia when he says 'men aren't giving up - they're being run over because they're lazy and can't multi-task'.
There is nothing more energised, more vital than a man who is loved and respected for being a successful man, a provider and a father.
But partly because of the way women have systematically traduced men and their manliness, partly because of the way we as a society have feted and institutionalised single motherhood, from the council estate to the boardroom, we haven't left much for men to do or be that is unique to them.
Even the education system is now skewed against them. Garcia is correct when he says that girls are outperforming boys at school, but it's not because they are brighter or more adept at surviving in a post-modern world, but because of the liberal engineering of state education that has made it more sympathetic to girls' learning skills and less so to those of boys.
And with the huge increase in university-educated girls, there is a social timebomb ticking.
In America, over the past 25 years the number of female undergraduates has grown more than twice as fast as their male counterparts.
According to Garcia, by 2006 women outnumbered men on American college campuses by more than two million.
Again, if the tables were turned and women were wildly outnumbered today in universities and if men were overtaking their achievements, there would be an outcry.
The feminists view the current state of play in the war of the sexes as a great victory - they feel it proves they were right and that women were smarter than men all along.
But it's like two armies locked in battle, one armed with bayonets, the other with Kalashnikovs. It's not been a fair fight.
One survey Garcia cites shows that, on average, females between the ages of 21 and 30 earned 117 per cent of males' wages in the same group.
And while women's wages have soared, wages for men have declined.
'Men are not just getting poorer, they're also getting dumber,' he says. And he's right. Beneath the lip gloss of metrosexual modern male, men are in trouble.
Men of all ages are becoming increasingly 'angry, suspicious, reactionary and isolated' because women have treated the men's natural roles without respect.
Who wouldn't become reactionary when all that you knew had been demeaned, taken from you or chipped away?
Who wouldn't feel isolated when society had institutionalised fatherlessness, thus eradicating the most vital and enhancing role any man can play in his life?
Garcia goes so far as to argue that the roles have flipped so much from the way they were, say, 50 years ago - and that men have become so emasculated and feminised - that 'men are the new women'.
If that's true, and sadly it is for some men, then women have a lot to answer for. And perhaps the greatest irony is that it's us who are the losers in the end.
You show me a woman who isn't attracted by strength, success, masculinity and I'll show you a lesbian.
Garcia argues that it is 'an undeniable reality that women are poised to become the dominant gender in America, and in many ways already are'.
With men already in decline, it's only going to get worse. Deep in a recession with so many jobs at risk, a man's native, competitive provider survival spirit has never been more necessary to millions of families' survival, and yet never have these qualities been so systematically diminished.
So when we most need men to be men, we've created a disproportionate number of men who are more pussycats than lions. Perhaps the real Decline Of Men has only just begun.
Or perhaps, just perhaps, they'll throw off their Prada, ditch the pedicures, stop crying and get in touch with their masculine side again. We can only hope.
Comment: Most of the men in society have now turned into sissies. They get pushed around by women. They are not real men. Ladies still long for the real thing. They hate pussies.
2008
Girlies 1
All these article trying to wiggle the real issue - Real men.
What Do Women Want In Men?
by Greg Wendland
Dating is confusing. The only thing more confusing than dating is women. What do you mean, what do I mean? I mean it. Whatever a woman tells you, chances are tomorrow she will feel differently about it. So, you are wondering just what is a woman looking for in a man. The truth is that the criteria really are that simple.
Honesty
Seriously, this is the most important criterion. Anyone that has been caught in a relationship where questions were consistently created by a partner's action understands the crippling power of "wondering". Women do not spend time worrying whether a man is interested or not, if they do not think so, they will move on. Do not play games, remember, honesty is the best policy.
Intelligence
Trust me, guys, women really do find this sexy. We are not talking Revenge of the Nerds intelligence. If you are wearing pocket protectors and pushing up your glasses every 3.35 seconds, chances are your intelligence is not going to help. However, if you can hold a decent conversation on a variety of topics, women will find you worth their time. College degrees are not a necessity, if you can debate topics and are well spoken, you will find a woman to be more attentive to you. So, take your hand out of your pants, Al Bundites, and use it to open a book.
Hard working
Lazy men will not get away with faking it. The most important thing is that a man has goals, even if they have not achieved them yet. Just to be seen as working towards those goals show ambition. Placing your job and future in a position of importance will show a woman that you have plans for your future and they will find that appealing. A serious red flag is one where a man cannot hold down a job. You may not be asked to hand in a resume to prospective girlfriends, but believe it guys, women are reviewing your work history.
Sense of Humor
Women love to laugh. When everything is falling apart, the one thing they look for is laughter. Keep this in mind, guys, if there are problems in the relationship your woman will be drawn to anyone who can make them laugh and feel special. If that is not you, be ready for a bumpy ride. Life is not always about laughter. Sometimes you have to be serious to handle serious problems. However, be sure to keep that sense of humor at the fore and available to your woman. She will find you more appealing and more dependable during the rough times.
Reliability
You want to be able to count on your partner, right? Women feel the same way. No matter the situation, women need to know that their man will be there through thick and thin. Are you a quitter? Do you give up easily? Women will see this, they will take note and they will remember. Keep in mind, that work resume they are silently reviewing will tell them a lot more about you than your actions. They need someone that will be there when everything starts going wrong. This does not mean smother your partner. It simply means, be available on a moments notice to comfort and support your woman in her endeavors.
Shared Values
Let's face it, if you don't share the same ideals and values as your partner, how are you ever going to survive in a long standing relationship? Opposites may attract, but they do not always work out in the end. If you do not share the same vision, a woman may question if you are the right man for her.
Strong Women v.s Weak Men
How strong women can find love too
by Gil Bryan
Everyone woman has in her the ability to help her man grow from failure to success. In other words, she was built with the necessary components to take his small vision and expand it to something grand.But just as she has the ability entrusted to her by Almighty God to help her man grow, if not used wisely this same ability can be used to hinder or stunt her man’s growth.
Every woman wants a great man. That is where the problem lies because you may have a great man but you can’t see it. If you look at what he has by the world’s standard or if you compare him to what the religious mind says, then he may not amount to much.
Based on what we are conditioned by television and other media to think about what a real man should be like maybe your man does not measure up. He doesn’t talk right. He may not have good ideas. He doesn’t have a good paying job, or he may not have a job at all.
No matter what his status, it is not your job to speak to and/or about what he is or is not and judge him by the world’s standard. It is your job to look at him and to speak to him as if you’re seeing him the way God saw him when He was creating him.
Whether you see it or not, God created this man to be a king. To rule and dominate in His stead on earth as if God himself was walking the earth… and you his queen by his side.
When you begin to look at your man, no matter what state he is in now, from the eyes of God, then you will see the vast treasure that lies within him. A treasure that is needing and begging to be cultivated and incubated by your words, your wisdom, your beauty and every gift that God has put inside of you.
There is a scripture that reads, “without a vision the people perish.” Even worse than that is to have two or more visions competing within the same household. Wherever there are two or more visions within the same house you have a “di” vision. The prefix “di” means two. And house with two or more separate visions is house divided and house divided cannot stand. Oh woman! Great and mighty that you are… See and know that your vision and his vision are one. And the only true way to savor God’s blessings is to look into his eyes and see the mirror of your soul and know without a doubt that when you help him rise to be all that he can be that you rise too.
Top 13 Things Women Want in a Man
The 13 most important qualities that women look forin a man are:
1. Honesty
2. Intelligence
3. Nice Smile
4. Sense of Humor
5. Manners
6. Sensitivity
7. Sincerity
8. Gainfully employed
9. Has own place
10. Owns a car
11. Affectionate
12. Considerate
13. Thoughtful
Source: AC - Life Style
comment: As you can see, the list does not contains balls. Women may tolerate a man who has other things, but if he is missing balls, then the pussy will not be respected. No woman likes a girlyman.
-
What Do Women Want In Men?
by Greg Wendland
Dating is confusing. The only thing more confusing than dating is women. What do you mean, what do I mean? I mean it. Whatever a woman tells you, chances are tomorrow she will feel differently about it. So, you are wondering just what is a woman looking for in a man. The truth is that the criteria really are that simple.
Honesty
Seriously, this is the most important criterion. Anyone that has been caught in a relationship where questions were consistently created by a partner's action understands the crippling power of "wondering". Women do not spend time worrying whether a man is interested or not, if they do not think so, they will move on. Do not play games, remember, honesty is the best policy.
Intelligence
Trust me, guys, women really do find this sexy. We are not talking Revenge of the Nerds intelligence. If you are wearing pocket protectors and pushing up your glasses every 3.35 seconds, chances are your intelligence is not going to help. However, if you can hold a decent conversation on a variety of topics, women will find you worth their time. College degrees are not a necessity, if you can debate topics and are well spoken, you will find a woman to be more attentive to you. So, take your hand out of your pants, Al Bundites, and use it to open a book.
Hard working
Lazy men will not get away with faking it. The most important thing is that a man has goals, even if they have not achieved them yet. Just to be seen as working towards those goals show ambition. Placing your job and future in a position of importance will show a woman that you have plans for your future and they will find that appealing. A serious red flag is one where a man cannot hold down a job. You may not be asked to hand in a resume to prospective girlfriends, but believe it guys, women are reviewing your work history.
Sense of Humor
Women love to laugh. When everything is falling apart, the one thing they look for is laughter. Keep this in mind, guys, if there are problems in the relationship your woman will be drawn to anyone who can make them laugh and feel special. If that is not you, be ready for a bumpy ride. Life is not always about laughter. Sometimes you have to be serious to handle serious problems. However, be sure to keep that sense of humor at the fore and available to your woman. She will find you more appealing and more dependable during the rough times.
Reliability
You want to be able to count on your partner, right? Women feel the same way. No matter the situation, women need to know that their man will be there through thick and thin. Are you a quitter? Do you give up easily? Women will see this, they will take note and they will remember. Keep in mind, that work resume they are silently reviewing will tell them a lot more about you than your actions. They need someone that will be there when everything starts going wrong. This does not mean smother your partner. It simply means, be available on a moments notice to comfort and support your woman in her endeavors.
Shared Values
Let's face it, if you don't share the same ideals and values as your partner, how are you ever going to survive in a long standing relationship? Opposites may attract, but they do not always work out in the end. If you do not share the same vision, a woman may question if you are the right man for her.
Strong Women v.s Weak Men
How strong women can find love too
by Gil Bryan
Everyone woman has in her the ability to help her man grow from failure to success. In other words, she was built with the necessary components to take his small vision and expand it to something grand.But just as she has the ability entrusted to her by Almighty God to help her man grow, if not used wisely this same ability can be used to hinder or stunt her man’s growth.
Every woman wants a great man. That is where the problem lies because you may have a great man but you can’t see it. If you look at what he has by the world’s standard or if you compare him to what the religious mind says, then he may not amount to much.
Based on what we are conditioned by television and other media to think about what a real man should be like maybe your man does not measure up. He doesn’t talk right. He may not have good ideas. He doesn’t have a good paying job, or he may not have a job at all.
No matter what his status, it is not your job to speak to and/or about what he is or is not and judge him by the world’s standard. It is your job to look at him and to speak to him as if you’re seeing him the way God saw him when He was creating him.
Whether you see it or not, God created this man to be a king. To rule and dominate in His stead on earth as if God himself was walking the earth… and you his queen by his side.
When you begin to look at your man, no matter what state he is in now, from the eyes of God, then you will see the vast treasure that lies within him. A treasure that is needing and begging to be cultivated and incubated by your words, your wisdom, your beauty and every gift that God has put inside of you.
There is a scripture that reads, “without a vision the people perish.” Even worse than that is to have two or more visions competing within the same household. Wherever there are two or more visions within the same house you have a “di” vision. The prefix “di” means two. And house with two or more separate visions is house divided and house divided cannot stand. Oh woman! Great and mighty that you are… See and know that your vision and his vision are one. And the only true way to savor God’s blessings is to look into his eyes and see the mirror of your soul and know without a doubt that when you help him rise to be all that he can be that you rise too.
Top 13 Things Women Want in a Man
The 13 most important qualities that women look forin a man are:
1. Honesty
2. Intelligence
3. Nice Smile
4. Sense of Humor
5. Manners
6. Sensitivity
7. Sincerity
8. Gainfully employed
9. Has own place
10. Owns a car
11. Affectionate
12. Considerate
13. Thoughtful
Source: AC - Life Style
comment: As you can see, the list does not contains balls. Women may tolerate a man who has other things, but if he is missing balls, then the pussy will not be respected. No woman likes a girlyman.
-
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
