Jump to content


Photo

The Virtues Of The Feminine


  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

#1 Anileve

Anileve

    Epicure Maximus

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,201 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:NYC
  • Interests:Running around at dawn and poking innocent bystanders with pipe cleaners.

Posted 06 February 2004 - 11:18 PM

http://www.savethemales.ca/040602.html

Don't you just love the domain name? laugh.gif

This is absolutely hysterical! I am sure that you girls would absolutely love this and some of the men of this forum would identify with this fruit. He is so Anti-Feminist, one has to wonder if he was seriously burned by women in the past. . I do find his thoughts a bit conflicting, on one hand he is also anti-multiculturalism and “cooks and shops” but at the age of 52 he married a Mexican woman, how is that for an anti-cultural ism. Get a load of this quote by him: “Our marriage proves that roles can be flexible when identities are secure”, yet he claims that women by nature are designated specific roles that should not be altered.

A strong man doesn't necessarily have to stay with a feminist, he is confident enough of his own security to be intimidated by the strong opinionated and independent woman, and chances are that he will regard her as equal. In terms of helping feminists I don't think that they need help, on the contrary of his faulty belief. It is the women that "gain their purpose in life through a man" that need to be helped. He also claims that feminists are lesbians, which the last time I checked, my mother, my friends and other women that surround me are very much comfortable in the company of men. What leads men to believe this fallacy is beyond me, in fact it is a myth created by men that feel the loss of their purpose in the circle of life, since they have been brought up to believe that they must be providers and their ultimate power comes from money and success. Rather than worry about the loss, they should be thankful of what is gained, that they no longer have to bear the sole responsibility of handling the financial strain, that a woman can really be a partner and a companion in all life's hardships.

This is generally the filth coming from very insecure men that are not used to the idea of strong women, thus at the age of 52 they marry a Mexican woman. wink.gif

Plus I love how he mentions that it's “Better to find a woman who is naturally feminine and naturally receptive.”" as if femininity is acquired by nature, although I know many very traditional women that completely lack femininity and many that are feminists that exude feminism, those are not the same or correlated. What gives the men the right to judge what a woman should be like anyway? I don't believe that many women go on preaching what is the standard of masculinity. As much as I understand that role is not engraved, different women want different things from men that are not a standard image of  a "provider", a lot of women nowadays simply want a companionship and to share their life by maintaining their independence and not clinging on to the man's pocket. Nonsense!

So what do you guys think? Do you agree or disagree with Mr. Expert on Feminity?

#2 Sip

Sip

    Buffet Connoisseur

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,366 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Online

Posted 06 February 2004 - 11:35 PM

QUOTE
Sexual intercourse and childbirth are manifestations of a spiritual relationship. A man must first plant his spirit in a woman's heart and find a warm reception. That spirit takes root and love grows into a sapling, and then a towering oak. Finally, a child is the expression of this unseen reality.


A "sapling" ... "towering oak" ... then "child"? I had never heard it phrased that way before. oops.gif


By the way, I liked that characterization of the "inverted" woman... always seeing the male as the predator ... and then putting herself in the shoes of the "victim".

#3 gevo27

gevo27

    Its one of the most beautiful sights... now i have to go see it.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,517 posts

Posted 06 February 2004 - 11:40 PM

QUOTE (Sip @ Feb 6 2004, 11:35 PM)
A "sapling" ... "towering oak" ... then "child"? I had never heard it phrased that way before. oops.gif


By the way, I liked that characterization of the "inverted" woman... always seeing the male as the predator ... and then putting herself in the shoes of the "victim".

Why you say that seaphan? anything particular about the article that interested you? lol. hmmmmm wink.gif

#4 Anileve

Anileve

    Epicure Maximus

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,201 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:NYC
  • Interests:Running around at dawn and poking innocent bystanders with pipe cleaners.

Posted 06 February 2004 - 11:49 PM

QUOTE (Sip @ Feb 7 2004, 01:35 AM)
A "sapling" ... "towering oak" ... then "child"? I had never heard it phrased that way before. oops.gif


By the way, I liked that characterization of the "inverted" woman... always seeing the male as the predator ... and then putting herself in the shoes of the "victim".

HAAAAAAA! I know there is a touch of romanticism in his writing, not necessary my idea of romance.


"A strong man might help a feminist rediscover her femininity. But you're dealing with milk that has curdled."

Interesting terminology regarding the milk metaphor ...A strong man might help a feminist and a weak men will falter and become effeminate. I guess the feminists need help finding their lost femininity, and they certainly need a man to show it to them, now wouldn't that suggest that he must be effeminate to help? That kind of tumbles the theory to the outskirts of my ex-soviet toilet...

"If I look at another woman, she doesn't jump on me. She's my friend, not my jailer."

Ahaaaaaaaa, why doesn't he just say so instead of rambling on and on. This seems to be the real issue here, I guess a feminist woman is to strong to be disrespected in public by him gawking at other women. However I find that sort of flawed too, because it is generally insecure women that jump to their partners throat for such action.

#5 Anonymouse

Anonymouse

    Julius Caesar was a salad dressing dude!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,244 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Los Angeles

Posted 07 February 2004 - 05:44 AM

Well the article was banal. What do men want in a woman? I want a woman that is intelligent, kind, and adventurous. I want a woman who will encourage and challenge me to better myself. I want a woman who I can share everything with, friendship, companionship, love, trust, and someone to laugh with. Most of all I want a feminine woman, not a butch.

I don't care about the article's stance but femininity is something that is beyond mere political labels of "feminism" or "traditionalism", it's just femininity.

Henry Makow also writes articles against Israel and the NWO conspiracy hehe, just a side issue.

#6 CheekY

CheekY

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 752 posts
  • Location:Venus

Posted 07 February 2004 - 10:00 AM

QUOTE (Anonymouse @ Feb 7 2004, 03:44 PM)
Well the article was banal. What do men want in a woman? I want a woman that is intelligent, kind, and adventurous. I want a woman who will encourage and challenge me to better myself. I want a woman who I can share everything with, friendship, companionship, love, trust, and someone to laugh with. Most of all I want a feminine woman, not a butch.


aww sorry but i'm already taken wink.gif tongue.gif

Edited by skittles, 07 February 2004 - 10:01 AM.


#7 den_wolf

den_wolf

    Here's the proof!

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 324 posts
  • Location:Liverpool

Posted 07 February 2004 - 12:35 PM

QUOTE
Most of all I want a feminine woman, not a butch.

O.K., your choice of women respected, but do you really think femininity is the ultimate marker of womanhood? And what IS your definition of a "woman." Is it someone who has the female genitals or someone who is feminine (that would imply that men who are feminine-acting are women)? Or both? The fact that there are categories "female" and "femininity" means that they are two separate and distinct things, that could occur simultaneously or separately.

#8 Anonymouse

Anonymouse

    Julius Caesar was a salad dressing dude!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,244 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Los Angeles

Posted 07 February 2004 - 01:45 PM

QUOTE (den_wolf @ Feb 7 2004, 12:35 PM)
O.K., your choice of women respected, but do you really think femininity is the ultimate marker of womanhood? And what IS your definition of a "woman." Is it someone who has the female genitals or someone who is feminine (that would imply that men who are feminine-acting are women)? Or both? The fact that there are categories "female" and "femininity" means that they are two separate and distinct things, that could occur simultaneously or separately.

Now let's not get "relative" here. Definitions are not important for we already know what the definitions are let's not make things pliable here.

I think we all know what femininity is and what distinguishes feminine women from butch or masculine women. That's all.

#9 den_wolf

den_wolf

    Here's the proof!

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 324 posts
  • Location:Liverpool

Posted 07 February 2004 - 02:20 PM

Yes, but who says which one is right and which one is wrong? Not that I'm claiming that you're saying that. Just trying to get a discussion going here. smile.gif

Don't get me wrong. I am not a feminist. Not that there's anything wrong with that. I also sport a very obvious dislike of radical feminists, be they women or men.

And it depends what you mean by "butch" women. Are you talking about the stereotypical lesbian butch or the short haired woman who is not necessarily masculine in the way she acts, but rather the way she dresses. It's all about a bunch of hair and what you do with it (let it grow or cut it), and clothing. I don't quite understand what the big fuss about all of that is. I'm not underestimating people's taste, just that a lot of people rule out the possibility of butch women being "real women." What's with that? The definition of woman has changed historically and geographically. Some of Levi-Strauss works on that might prove to be helpful in catching up on cultural relativity of what femininity and masculinity are all about. Of course, that doesn't mean that there are no absolute truths, but so far, there has been no proof that the "right" thing to do for women is to act "feminine" and that to act in an "unfeminine" way is abnormal. Or maybe I'm wrong. I don't read much about the scientific analysis of gender and what's related to that (hormones, ..?)

You're saying that definitions are not important here. How can you use a label and argue that its definition is not important? How you define something is what makes your use of that term meaningful. Otherwise it's nothing but a word that you use in order to "show" that you're knowledgeable about the latest trends in terminology.

#10 Sip

Sip

    Buffet Connoisseur

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,366 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Online

Posted 07 February 2004 - 02:35 PM

QUOTE (Anonymouse @ Feb 7 2004, 01:45 PM)
I think we all know what femininity is and what distinguishes feminine women from butch or masculine women. That's all.

I am not so sure. If you ask a typical "traditional" armenian, he or she may tell you that feminine if synonimous with submissive, obedient, and passive.

In my version of "feminine", a woman can be quite the opposite of the above yet still be feminine. A woman can be outspoken, caring, nurturing, open, observant, and to some extent rebelious while still not be "butch" at all.

Actually, come to think of it, "feminine" in the traditional sense is a big turn off for me blink.gif

#11 Anonymouse

Anonymouse

    Julius Caesar was a salad dressing dude!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,244 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Los Angeles

Posted 07 February 2004 - 03:52 PM

QUOTE (Sip @ Feb 7 2004, 02:35 PM)
In my version of "feminine", a woman can be quite the opposite of the above yet still be feminine. A woman can be outspoken, caring, nurturing, open, observant, and to some extent rebelious while still not be "butch" at all.

You're definition is what I agree with.

#12 gevo27

gevo27

    Its one of the most beautiful sights... now i have to go see it.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,517 posts

Posted 07 February 2004 - 09:05 PM

I dont really see how and why the definition of femininity or woman need be described at all...

I think its down to the individuals heart that one is judged, we all very well have our good vs. bad sides.. (bad as in places needing improvement)... so i dont see the reason to described the two words above... I mean that would be generalizing very distinct personlaities into one catagory... would it not?

And for each individual who judges a woman as " feminine or not" is comparing with every other woman... Why do that, why compare one who you love, or are wanting to love, to so many other distinct personalities... Comparing is one way of future problems, so you must judgde that specific individual on his/her merits.. and compatibility with your..

Am i making sense.. ?? its hard for me to write exactly how i feel and what i mean.. but i tried smile.gif

#13 Sip

Sip

    Buffet Connoisseur

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,366 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Online

Posted 07 February 2004 - 09:08 PM

QUOTE (gevo27 @ Feb 7 2004, 09:05 PM)
Am i making sense.. ?? its hard for me to write exactly how i feel and what i mean.. but i tried smile.gif

You are not making any sense since if you don't compare, you cannot make relative statements about different women and you either will not like anyone, will be neutral towards all, or will like everyone. I highly doubt any of those 3 cases is true for you.

Unless you are saying you don't differentiate femininie and masculine in which case I'd say you got deeper problems than not being able to express how you feel biggrin.gif

#14 den_wolf

den_wolf

    Here's the proof!

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 324 posts
  • Location:Liverpool

Posted 07 February 2004 - 09:26 PM

QUOTE
You are not making any sense since if you don't compare, you cannot make relative statements about different women and you either will not like anyone, will be neutral towards all, or will like everyone.

Sip, I disagree. I think it's the other way around. That is, if you don't make relative statements, you don't need to compare (and in fact are not comparing). So if you look at a certain woman for who she is regardless of her "level" of femininity on the gender spectrum, you are looking at her outside the boundaries of gender (note the difference between sex and gender). Moreover, looking at a woman and evaluating her femininity on a scale, does not imply that you are comparing that woman with all the women or with any particular woman per se, but with the concept of gender and the concept of women as "feminine." Comparison is not the bases of liking or loving someone, unless you say to Woman A, "You're better than Woman B or Woman C, so I like and love you", then that becomes a different issue altogether. But liking someone is not relative. You don't like someone in relation to others. You just like someone. You don't say to your "lover", "I love you more than our neighbour's wife" (or I hope you don't LOL), you say "I love you." Correct? smile.gif

Edited by den_wolf, 07 February 2004 - 09:30 PM.


#15 angel4hope

angel4hope

    look at me...i can fly!...sploosh!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,595 posts
  • Location:a flicker in yur neuronal connectivities
  • Interests:too many to list... btw i love eye candy! therefore my addiction, and hence my diabetes :(

Posted 07 February 2004 - 09:33 PM

vert true sip...feminine does not always have to mean submissive..and as the armenian culture views it as "hamest" and agreeable all the time...

i myself, when i hear the word feminine...in this case..i think of someone who has her own views, ideas, opinions, and is quite independent, buthas that certain aspect... that way with people that makes her feminine...

#16 Sip

Sip

    Buffet Connoisseur

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,366 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Online

Posted 07 February 2004 - 09:45 PM

So Den, let me get this straight ...

Let's say there is a person A and a person B. You are saying you are not comparing A and B directly.

But what you are saying, is there is a generic concept femininity ... call it Lambda ... you compare A to lambda, and make some decision about A. Then you compare B to lambda, and make some decision about B. Isn't that implicitly comparing A and B?

#17 den_wolf

den_wolf

    Here's the proof!

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 324 posts
  • Location:Liverpool

Posted 07 February 2004 - 09:57 PM

QUOTE (Sip @ Feb 8 2004, 03:45 AM)
But what you are saying, is there is a generic concept femininity ... call it Lambda ... you compare A to lambda, and make some decision about A. Then you compare B to lambda, and make some decision about B. Isn't that implicitly comparing A and B?

No. Since the term "femininity" is defined very loosely and varies from one culture and person to another, you're not comparing one person to another by comparing both to the "same" thing. And since we are human beings with free will and autonomy, there is no way one person can be compared to another on an absolute scale. Hence why I used the term "spectrum." And because femininity is not a fixed concept for any one person (i.e. it changes over time and certain situations), it cannot be used for comparison as something absolute and static. smile.gif It's not as simple as saying, if A = B, and B = C, then A = C.

#18 Anonymouse

Anonymouse

    Julius Caesar was a salad dressing dude!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,244 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Los Angeles

Posted 07 February 2004 - 11:04 PM

Ahh you must be a relativist. Relativity eventually negates itself. Perhaps we need a thread on Moral Relativism, or just "All things are relative" in general.

#19 den_wolf

den_wolf

    Here's the proof!

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 324 posts
  • Location:Liverpool

Posted 08 February 2004 - 01:36 AM

QUOTE (Anonymouse @ Feb 8 2004, 05:04 AM)
Ahh you must be a relativist. Relativity eventually negates itself. Perhaps we need a thread on Moral Relativism, or just "All things are relative" in general.

No I am not. I am neither an absolutist nor a relativist. I pick and choose philosophical theories in a way that I see best fit according to the situation. In that sense, I guess I am a relativist. biggrin.gif I think philosophical theories are relative. I suppose I'm going way over my head here, especially for someone who just woke up. rolleyes.gif

#20 Anileve

Anileve

    Epicure Maximus

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,201 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:NYC
  • Interests:Running around at dawn and poking innocent bystanders with pipe cleaners.

Posted 08 February 2004 - 01:40 AM

Excellent posts Wolfy! thumbup.gif Thanks and welcome to the forum, what a cool addition you make! wink.gif




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users